Re: [Vo]:Info about the fuel me356 uses in his reactor.

2017-09-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Bob, Axil, Nick etc

Over on ECW Me356 made a very interesting reply to me that I think you might 
find interesting.

I was asking about the materials in first pictures he sent but his reply gives 
some interesting details:

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/interview_with_me356_working_towards_commercialization/#comment-3517810748

Interestingly he says that brighter components are from heavier atoms and even 
more interestingly that heavier are at the end of those tracks and lighter 
atoms at the beginning.

I also had some thoughts about what might cause this, I'm quite curious what 
you think.

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/interview_with_me356_working_towards_commercialization/#comment-3517825057

Just some thoughts going through my mind right now:

I wonder if those tracks compositions are arranged like that due to some kind 
of sorting of elrements in an electric or magnetic field or if they are due to 
some kind of transmutation.

If it is sorting it is strange they form tracks and that the light elements are 
at the beginning and  heavier elements are at the end of the tracks I would 
expect the heavier ones to be deposited first. Although I suppose the degree of 
ionization would also play some role. On the other hand the tracks seem aligned 
to some degree which might imply some kind of field I suppose.

If it's transmutations that's really amazing but I suppose it could be found if 
unusual elements or isotopes are present.

I wonder if there is some kind of transmuting agent along The lines Axil 
suggests or Bobs charge clusters or Some kind of dense Hydrogen if it is 
initially traveling at speed then slowing down if it would have stronger 
transmutation affects locally at slower speeds hence leading to heavier atoms 
towards the end of the tracks.

One strange thing I noticed is that it seems that the apparent branching in 
those patterned tracks are very often at close to 90 degrees even the smaller 
patterns seem to show this effect. It almost seems to me they need to be 
orthogonal. Could this tell us about something about the physical process... is 
it implying spinning particles or something that need to be orthogonal to not 
interfere with each other or some other vector property that has to be 
orthogonal ? Or could it be an artifact of stresses in the carbon tape.

I wonder if he was also able to look at the composition of the spikes in the 
later picture. Its interesting he attached them in reply to Axil after Axil was 
talking about UDH but would such material show up in these images. On the other 
hand can Nickel crystals form sharp spikes like this? very curious.i would live 
to see their composition. At least if conductive I wonder if the affect the EM 
environment strongly especially in a glow discharge.

Nick's images of marks on wood look intriguing to me too it's a good approach I 
think to look for analogues.

Sent from my iPhone

On 16 Sep 2017, at 04:50, Bob Higgins 
> wrote:

The photos of ME356's fuel are fascinating.  I don't know what to make of the 
fractal growth on the carbon sticky tape.  I would love to see an EDS of the 
fractal growth.  Ni crystals do tend to grow when there is sufficient heat and 
in the absence of oxygen, but the Ni crystals are normally spiky spears (as is 
seen in some of the photos).  I can't believe that the fractal growth is 
metallic hydrogen - just too far fetched Axil.

I can speculate about what ME356 does to prepare his fuel.  Here are a few 
thoughts:

  *   The fuel is Ni or Ni alloy wire wound into a coil shape that will fit 
into a reactor tube.

  *   From what we have seen, it doesn't seem like ME356's reactor runs a 
current through this coil - it is possible, but it is risks short term burnout 
limiting the life of the reactor.  My guess is that it is just a coiled up wire 
fuel inside of a fused silica or ceramic tube that contains the fuel coil and 
H2 gas.

  *   ME356 talks of pre-treating his fuel.  He says that the longer he 
pre-treats the fuel the more active it is in producing LENR.  I think the 
pre-treatment consists of putting the Ni coil inside a vacuum chamber, that has 
been evacuated to less than 1 micron.  The wire is heated and cooled until it 
stops outgassing.  Then the chamber is filled with about 10 torr of H2, the 
wire is heated, and the wire or an adjacent Ni electrode is driven with RF at 
one of the ISM band frequencies.  This will provide some sputter-like 
activation of the surface.

  *   After the hot sputter processing, take the coil out and put it into the 
reactor tube and heat in H2 for LENR.




Re: [Vo]:Whats wrong with this picture?

2017-03-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
Ahh just a correction it's the Hertzsprung Russell diagram.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertzsprung–Russell_diagram

Im definitely rusty on this.



Sent from my iPhone

On 30 Mar 2017, at 20:09, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

Yup I think helium content could play apart. I'm not sure how much gets mixed 
up to the surface.

It's going back decades since I followed this stuff but if I remember right 
more normally I think they look at the size, mass and colour of the stars as in 
the Hershel Russell diagram to determine their age. But this is not the whole 
picture as we also have different generation of stars. I think stars in 
globular clusters for example are typically older generation stars so are 
typically off to the side of the diagram and also typically have higher 
concentrations of Hydrogen.

Typically older generation stars have more "metals" in astrophysical terms 
"metals" are elements heavier than Helium.

1st generation stars are just made of hydrogen and helium and some Lithium that 
was formed in the Big Bang. Interestingly stars can actually burn the Lithium 
so the abundance of Lithium in stars can be less than expected. At least that 
is the normal explanation.

Certainly helium content should help identify older generations of stars though 
along with amounts of other elements.

It's very curious to think about the possible role of LENR especially if dusty 
plasmas are present in later generations. Even Nova on white dwarfs might show 
interesting signatures. It's an interesting idea I think.


On 30 Mar 2017, at 19:34, Jed Rothwell 
<jedrothw...@gmail.com<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:

<mix...@bigpond.com<mailto:mix...@bigpond.com>> wrote:

I wonder how they know the age?

From the make up of the gasses, I believe. Young stars have more hydrogen. I 
suppose if cold fusion is playing a role that method may not be accurate.

- Jed



Re: [Vo]:Whats wrong with this picture?

2017-03-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
Yup I think helium content could play apart. I'm not sure how much gets mixed 
up to the surface.

It's going back decades since I followed this stuff but if I remember right 
more normally I think they look at the size, mass and colour of the stars as in 
the Hershel Russell diagram to determine their age. But this is not the whole 
picture as we also have different generation of stars. I think stars in 
globular clusters for example are typically older generation stars so are 
typically off to the side of the diagram and also typically have higher 
concentrations of Hydrogen.

Typically older generation stars have more "metals" in astrophysical terms 
"metals" are elements heavier than Helium.

1st generation stars are just made of hydrogen and helium and some Lithium that 
was formed in the Big Bang. Interestingly stars can actually burn the Lithium 
so the abundance of Lithium in stars can be less than expected. At least that 
is the normal explanation.

Certainly helium content should help identify older generations of stars though 
along with amounts of other elements.

It's very curious to think about the possible role of LENR especially if dusty 
plasmas are present in later generations. Even Nova on white dwarfs might show 
interesting signatures. It's an interesting idea I think.


On 30 Mar 2017, at 19:34, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:

> wrote:

I wonder how they know the age?

From the make up of the gasses, I believe. Young stars have more hydrogen. I 
suppose if cold fusion is playing a role that method may not be accurate.

- Jed



Re: [Vo]:Whats wrong with this picture?

2017-03-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
Very interesting find thanks for that. I'm definitely all curious now.

Is it right the larger object is almost pure Hydrogen this is very curious for 
a young object.

Or is it a small a very old 1st generation object from primordial gas?

The implications that dusty plasma may play a role in later generation objects 
sufficient to cause Stella like heating is fascinating.

I do wonder if the smaller bright object could be a white dwarf that has 
acquired new material some how but still in sufficient to form a nova.

Interesting

Stephen


On 27 Mar 2017, at 19:00, Jones Beene 
> wrote:



The smallest known star that astronomers have found is named OGLE-TR-122b. Its 
radius is accurately measured at 167,000 km. That makes it 20% larger than 
planet Jupiter but like most stars, it is radiating energy in a way which 
indicates that nuclear fusion has been underway for billions of years, 
presumably converting hydrogen into helium like our sun, only less of it, and 
at longer wavelength, due to the small size.

Yet today, without reference to the presence of any small star, the science 
news is reporting a much larger dim object has been found, not a star and more 
like a planet, which is 90 times more massive than Jupiter. This object is not 
undergoing nuclear fusion. It is called SDSS J0104+1535 and consists of more 
than 99.99% hydrogen and helium but without nuclear ignition, despite the 
enormous gravity.

It is not clear that "high purity" is an actual parameter which prohibits it 
from going nuclear, since it makes little sense that so much hydrogen would not 
ignite, as happens in the much smaller star, due to the Lawson criteria if 
nothing else. There is such a massive disparity in the energy released from the 
smaller and hotter object, compared to the much larger colder object- that 
great doubt is cast on many assumptions relative to nuclear fusion at the 
cosmological scale.

Does LENR have a place in this picture?

The smaller, dirtier and much hotter object may be undergoing energetic 
reactions which are not the same as fusion in our sun, for instance. If it is 
less pure, then much of that impurity would be iron and nickel - just like many 
meteorites. Notably these two metals are catalysts for LENR.

I would be willing to bet that not a single reputable astronomer will bring up 
this possibility - that the smallest stars could be powered by LENR instead of 
hot fusion, but can we rule out the possibility ? Is there a better explanation 
for the strange picture which has been presented above?

.


Re: [Vo]:Gullstrom-Rossi theory of nuclear/electron-spin-orbit coupling with nuclear transitions to lower potential energy

2017-03-24 Thread Stephen Cooke
Well one thing I found interesting is the light Sigma Mesons referred to in 
this paper is I think around 500MeV.

This is quite close I think to the mass of the Kaons.

Could nucleon resonance of a Sigma Meson some how open the door to Kaon 
emission?

There is a nucleon resonance window for Phi meson emission used by Kaon 
factories such as Delphi and other such experiments but I suppose this would 
require higher energies around 900MeV.



On 23 Mar 2017, at 16:15, Jones Beene 
<jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:


Well, this could actually win a prize - in the existential fiction category. It 
is most reminiscent of Sartre's 'Being and Nothingness.'

The "Summary and Discussion" at the end essentially says it all: "The needed 
parameters are not known from experiment" 

This would not be the first time that a decent explanation is desperately 
seeking to find a validating experiment, but there is a logical disconnect 
midway through, with no attempt to integrate two distinct topics... indicating 
that there is no there there.

Possibly a PR event in disguise... aimed at influencing an upcoming jury trial


Stephen Cooke wrote:
If I'm not wrong this coupling of isospin states of the sigma meson could even 
have implications at nucleon level. Especially if it really is the mediator of 
the strong force as has been speculated over the last few decades.

If this theory turns out to be correct and if I understood correctly that there 
is a long range coupling component under special conditions I wonder if this 
could also have implications for Holmlids ideas and experiments?

"bobcook39...@gmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@gmail.com>" wrote:

VORTS—

Finally a theory coupling electron orbital energy states with nuclear energy 
states involving magnetic fields and isotopic shifts to lower potential energy.

It fits the LENR multibody reaction model and explains the lack of energetic 
particles associated with two- body nuclear reactions.   I give it a thumbs up!

And it may be in time for consideration by the distinguished Swedish Committee 
that evaluates scientific advances for 2017.

Bob Cook



Re: [Vo]:Gullstrom-Rossi theory of nuclear/electron-spin-orbit coupling with nuclear transitions to lower potential energy

2017-03-24 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Frank,

You know since discovering your book I have always found your ideas 
interesting. I should take a look at it again though it's been a while.

I do think ideas have their time and come round again sometimes decades later. 
Sometimes after future breakthroughs people revisit past ideas and sudden they 
seem much clearer. I think there is a lot of potential for that with current 
breakthroughs in LENR.

Stephen

On 23 Mar 2017, at 16:06, Frank Znidarsic 
> wrote:


If I'm not wrong this coupling of isospin states of the sigma meson could even 
have implications at nucleon level. Especially if it really is the mediator of 
the strong force as has been speculated over the last few decades.



The nuclear-magnetic spin orbit force (not electro-magnetic) is not conserved.  
Under certain conditions it can dramatically increase in range.
I said this 18 years ago at a meeting of ANS-2000  and it was published by ANS. 
 The condition is:

"The constants of the motion tend toward the electromagnetic in a Bose 
condensate that is stimulated at a a dimensional frequency of 1,094,000 metes 
per second."

No-one else has been this precise.

Frank Z


Re: [Vo]:Gullstrom-Rossi theory of nuclear/electron-spin-orbit coupling with nuclear transitions to lower potential energy

2017-03-23 Thread Stephen Cooke
If I'm not wrong this coupling of isospin states of the sigma meson could even 
have implications at nucleon level. Especially if it really is the mediator of 
the strong force as has been speculated over the last few decades.

If this theory turns out to be correct and if I understood correctly that there 
is a long range coupling component under special conditions I wonder if this 
could also have implications for Holmlids ideas and experiments?


On 23 Mar 2017, at 04:22, 
"bobcook39...@gmail.com" 
> wrote:

VORTS—

Finally a theory coupling electron orbital energy states with nuclear energy 
states involving magnetic fields and isotopic shifts to lower potential energy.

It fits the LENR multibody reaction model and explains the lack of energetic 
particles associated with two- body nuclear reactions.   I give it a thumbs up!

And it may be in time for consideration by the distinguished Swedish Committee 
that evaluates scientific advances for 2017.

Bob Cook


Re: [Vo]:Penon described the position of flow meter

2017-02-21 Thread Stephen Cooke
Jed

So changing "external plant" to "external tank" and changing "internal tank " 
to "external tank" is correcting bad English... Uhhh okaayy ??

The internal tank was inside the E-Cat plant not the external one.

I'm not going to get drawn into childish bickering. I intend to wait from now 
on for real data not opinions and if that is not forthcoming then I wait with 
curiosity for the Judgement.


Sent from my iPhone

On 21 Feb 2017, at 16:12, Jed Rothwell 
<jedrothw...@gmail.com<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> 
wrote:

Jed.. nice square bracketing.

As I said, that was added by Abd. I do not know where the original document is 
in the lawsuit papers.


What if we remove those... and assume the ERV's English is fine.

It isn't fine! It is difficult to understand.


Have you considered the external tank could be located at the external plant 
close to the condensor?

No, the diagram shows where it is. The condenser in the walled-off customer 
site. The reservoir is inside the shipping container. At least, that's what 
Rossi showed, and that is what I have heard.


In fact everything we say is speculation and can be interpreted how we want 
depending how we want to read it especially if we change the words someone says 
to support it.

It is not "speculation"! That's absurd. There are words directly from Rossi, 
uploaded in the lawsuit. If he is lying here it is a serious matter.

You have this directly from the horse's mouth yet you still don't believe it? 
How much proof can you ask for? Why would Rossi lie and tell the court the flow 
meter was installed in the gravity return pipe if that were not true?


I wait with anticipation for the flow diagram.

Why do you need it? Rossi and Penon already told you what is in it. If you 
don't believe what they wrote, why would you believe their diagram showing the 
same thing?

- Jed



Re: [Vo]:Penon described the position of flow meter

2017-02-21 Thread Stephen Cooke
Jed.. nice square bracketing.

What if we remove those... and assume the ERV's English is fine.

Have you considered the external tank could be located at the external plant 
close to the condensor?

In fact everything we say is speculation and can be interpreted how we want 
depending how we want to read it especially if we change the words someone says 
to support it.

I wait with anticipation for the flow diagram.

On 21 Feb 2017, at 10:47, Peter Gluck 
> wrote:

This was dicussed already twice but DeJavu is a reality (see
my blog today about the psychological phenomenon).
Question: do yu have information from Rossi or you have the piping
diagram of the plant showing clearly and exactly (as position) where
in the gravity return pipe was placed the flowmeter?
Can you ke a look and tell where was placed the main pump (for 1500
kg/hour- floating in the air or firmly placed on the ground?

In any case NOT measuring the flow of water which enters directly
to the generators and using a 25 times undersized pipe for steam are fatal 
flaws and if your favorite author Murray got it right than he is the diamond 
witness for IH. On the contrary if he errs than he is just a plant illiterate
trying to find imaginary things- doing harm fo those who have paid him.

If you have such a ardent desire to contradict my assertions, show the diagram 
and..finita la commedia!
It happens I know steam is able to condense from practice and books.

peter

ps Do you have amnesia regarding the persons who all stated the
flowmeter was used to quadruple the flow? You tell sensational things and we 
have to believe you

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
There has been some discussion here about the position of the flow meter in 
Rossi's configuration. I have information from Rossi showing it was located in 
the gravity return between the customer site and the reservoir. I do not think 
there was a U pipe but I cannot rule that out 100%. Nothing like that is shown 
and no one who was there told me there is one -- and I did ask. Anyway, Abd 
pointed out that Penon described the configuration in one of the lawsuit 
documents. It is a little hard to understand Penon's English, so Abd added the 
comments in square brackets:

Quote

The steam is then passed through the customer’s facility, where it cools up to 
its condensation. *

– flowmeter for measuring the flow rate of cooling water inlet into the 
shelter. It is located along the line of return of the water. between the Plant 
of the Customer and the 1 MW E-Cat.

The cooling water is contained in a tank, placed inside the Plant, that 
receives the water from an external plant [sic, “tank”].

It is conveyed by pumps in [sic, “into”] the unit’s E-cat[s], where it is 
heated to vaporize. The steam is collected in one tube of the steam line, which 
conveys it to the outside of the shelter.

The water is so recycled to the internal [sic, external] tank in a closed loop. 
The water is distilled water.

The external tank is connected with the internal tank, by a water line and a 
floating valve, so that the level of water inside the internal tank is 
maintained constant. The water flows from the external tank to the internal 
tank by gravity. […]


* Note from Jed: "Cools up to its condensation" means it cools down until it 
condenses.

This contradicts assertions by Peter Gluck.

- Jed




--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


[Vo]:ICIN-G

2017-01-03 Thread Stephen Cooke
The following thoughts are purely conceptual and speculative and lack the 
deeper understanding and critical analysis of most concepts discussed here but 
i have been wondering about them so i thought someone here might be able to 
help.


I have been wondering over past months what happens when an atom in ground 
state becomes "colder". Both at electron orbital and nucleus level.


In the past i questioned here i think but also on the physics stack exchange 
what happens to lower electron shell levels when a a nucleus undergoes decay or 
if some other transient particle interaction (such as a proton or neutron) 
inside the electron orbitals causes the electron existing energy to be 
insufficient to remain in the lower orbital. I was wondering if it could lead 
to "Hydrino", "Hyds" states for example or other less stable lower energy 
states of the electron or the energy would be recovered from elsewhere. (I 
suppose its would be also relevant to electrons higher orbitals if their energy 
was insufficient and what this would mean if lower energy electrons over 
populated the available orbitals). I was wondering if their could be some 
quantised photon emission signature in some transitions that could be observed 
when a system moved from a lower to higher energy state and what would happen 
if it moved from a higher to lower energy state. At the time a little over a 
year ago i think i had some reply on physics stack exchange that my question 
was relevant but in fact the electrons would remain in their orbitals due to 
their probability function and quantum mechanical nature of the electrons 
within atoms. Never the less if this were to happen i suppose energy would need 
to be extracted from the system to account for the energy removed by the 
interaction. I suppose that energy would need to come from the nucleus or 
extracted from some other external source.


More recently i have been wondering about a another very speculative but 
related question: What happens in a nucleus if it is in ground state has energy 
extracted from it by some interaction (perhaps such as that above) such that it 
can no longer support the nucleons in ground state? Conservation rules would 
require the number of quarks to remain the same etc? but a lot of the energy 
(and mass) would be tied up in Gluons and the Strong force? Would there be a 
path where a Gluon could decay into photons but still retain conservation of 
states in a nucleus. If so the interactions between nucleons are often 
visualised as an exchange of virtual pions. What would happen to the nucleons 
if one of these were to disappear due to insufficient energy in the system?


I'm wondering if there is a path here to "very cold nuclear effects" at local 
atomic/ nucleus level a kind of (Incredibly Cold Induced Nuclear de Generation 
[ICIN-G]).


Are these thoughts and concepts credible? And if so has any work been done on 
these kinds of concepts?



Re: [Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Bob

I think you are right about factors out side the nucleus being of great 
importance.

I was wondering if the data from these transmutations and isotopic shifts could 
tell us something independent of any theory about the nucleus. For example if 
the observed data requires particular states to form and if this could tell us 
something about the environment or processes external to the nucleus itself.

I guess much of this has already been considered by many.l though. So probably 
I should read a bit more too ;)

Sent from my iPhone

On 16 Sep 2016, at 17:12, Bob Higgins 
<rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com<mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Actually what you describe has already happened.  Norman Cook himself is 
weighing in on a theory of LENR.  However, I don't think it is that simple.  
Dr. Cook is well versed at what happens inside the nucleus, but the LENR 
phenomenon is bigger than that - it needs a condensed matter physicist also 
versed in nuclear physics.  Now the field narrows.  Even then, there is 
probably the need for introduction of new physical phenomena that are not 
recognized or understood today - perhaps the ignored negative solutions to 
Dirac's equation that were swept under the rug by Feynman.

Looking simply at the nuclear physics end alone is like saying that LENR is 
related to hot fusion, wherein only the two fusing nuclei are the domain of the 
problem because they are isolated when they react.

That is why LENR is reported in the Journal of "Condensed Matter Nuclear 
Science" - a science that embodies nuclear science and also condensed matter 
(solids).

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:


Actually it would be interesting to give this data to an expert on nuclear 
physics who has no bias one way or other about LENR and see what he comes up 
with as an explanation.




Re: [Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks very much Eric for the pointers to the other papers and for the link to 
your interesting paper too.

I have a lot to catch up with it seems.

I was wondering if the transmutations and isotopic evolutions could turn out to 
require certain states such as excitation or parity spin states or some more 
subtle conditions that might help inform about a higher level external process 
or environment . Rather than first looking at external processes and seeing how 
they affect the nucleus.

But I have a lot to read to catch up with most of you here who have been doing 
this for years and probably have already considered this approach.

Sent from my iPhone

On 16 Sep 2016, at 15:11, Eric Walker 
<eric.wal...@gmail.com<mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

This [using Norman Cook's theory as a guide] would be a bottom up approach from 
first principles which might the match well with one or more of the more usual 
top down theories ideas.

This sounds like a top-down approach, starting from some assumptions about 
what's going on and then interpreting the data.  What I was thinking of was a 
bottom-up approach, where one keeps theory out of the picture as much and just 
catalogues what's been found.  Ed Storm's "Science of Low Energy Nuclear 
Reaction" gives a good high-level overview, but it doesn't go into sufficient 
detail.  After reading that book, it's probably good to start looking at actual 
experimental papers.  There are several authors that have repeatedly reported 
them over the years, including but not limited to these ones:

  *   Iwamura
  *   Mizuno
  *   Saavatimova
  *   Karabut

Reading their papers is a good start.  Although transmutations are all over the 
map, there are a handful of possible patterns that could be followed up on 
more.  Here is a speculative attempt I made not at systematizing the data but 
at guessing at what's going on: http://vixra.org/pdf/1512.0278v2.pdf.  Because 
it was speculative, one shouldn't draw any conclusions from it.  Also, there's 
a section on Rossi that is unfortunately probably incorrect and should be 
ignored.

What I would have loved when I was writing that paper was a reliable 
systematization of the transmutation research, which goes into great detail on 
what's been reported without introducing theoretical considerations.

Eric



Re: [Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Your largely of course about Norman Cook having his own views about how to 
present the Nucleus, but I found the initial part of his book where he 
describes the relationship between various states and nucleus stability which 
is data based and independent of his ideas quite interesting.

By bottom up I mean looking at and understanding the raw data from the isotope 
and transmutations in the nucleus in this data and comparing it to other known 
raw data to see if it can inform about higher level processes that could be 
nuclear, atomic, chemical or any number of higher level processes.


On 16 Sep 2016, at 15:11, Eric Walker 
<eric.wal...@gmail.com<mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

This [using Norman Cook's theory as a guide] would be a bottom up approach from 
first principles which might the match well with one or more of the more usual 
top down theories ideas.

This sounds like a top-down approach, starting from some assumptions about 
what's going on and then interpreting the data.  What I was thinking of was a 
bottom-up approach, where one keeps theory out of the picture as much and just 
catalogues what's been found.  Ed Storm's "Science of Low Energy Nuclear 
Reaction" gives a good high-level overview, but it doesn't go into sufficient 
detail.  After reading that book, it's probably good to start looking at actual 
experimental papers.  There are several authors that have repeatedly reported 
them over the years, including but not limited to these ones:

  *   Iwamura
  *   Mizuno
  *   Saavatimova
  *   Karabut

Reading their papers is a good start.  Although transmutations are all over the 
map, there are a handful of possible patterns that could be followed up on 
more.  Here is a speculative attempt I made not at systematizing the data but 
at guessing at what's going on: http://vixra.org/pdf/1512.0278v2.pdf.  Because 
it was speculative, one shouldn't draw any conclusions from it.  Also, there's 
a section on Rossi that is unfortunately probably incorrect and should be 
ignored.

What I would have loved when I was writing that paper was a reliable 
systematization of the transmutation research, which goes into great detail on 
what's been reported without introducing theoretical considerations.

Eric



Re: [Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Eric I agree with what you said here completely.

I think it could be well worth some one with an un biased mind looking through 
these transmutations and isotope evolutions to see what information it throws 
up.

I guess for most of us find it very difficult to do though as I think we all 
have our own pet theories or ideas though or opinions on others that can only 
influence us.

I guess people like Iwamura are doing avoid job at identifying them though.

After Jones Beene recommendation I have been reading through parts of Ed Storms 
book again it's amazing what's in there when you look back at it. I read it 
initially a year or so ago as an introduction to LENR when I was new to the 
subject but it's really of benefit once you have learnt a bit more about it. He 
made a huge work with that book I think.

I agree with you though now after re-reading these sections there are 
transmutations all over the place. But perhaps combining Ed Storms book with 
some information in Norman Cooks book about Nuclear Structure which has some 
interesting factual information an correlation of states with structure and a 
good advanced book on quantum mechanics and Quantum tunneling some one could 
make some sense of the transmutations and isotope evolutions from first 
principles that could the go on to inform both theory at atomic level and 
theory regarding the kinds of environments required to generate those 
conditions. This would be a bottom up approach from first principles which 
might the match well with one or more of the more usual top down theories ideas.

Actually it would be interesting to give this data to an expert on nuclear 
physics who has no bias one way or other about LENR and see what he comes up 
with as an explanation.


On 16 Sep 2016, at 02:33, Eric Walker 
<eric.wal...@gmail.com<mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com>> wrote:

>From what I've seen, there's transmutations all over the map.  This is an area 
>that is in need of systematization in the hands of someone careful who does 
>not have a pet theory to advance, or who can do a rigorous job despite having 
>a pet theory.  This is the kind of topic for which it would be easy to draw 
>facile generalizations that on closer inspection are a bit light on the 
>evidence, something I think is regularly done.  And you'd want someone to 
>avoid simply adopting the researchers' own conclusions and just look at the 
>data they publish.

One conclusion that should in my opinion be avoided as an example of such a 
facile generalization: the transmutations are insufficient to account for 
excess heat.  While it is true that some LENR researchers have convinced 
themselves of this, one need only realize that if carbon or silicon or some 
other common "impurity" is actually a transmutation byproduct, then there could 
potentially be a lot of excess heat that could be ascribed to the transmutation 
process, especially if one includes fission byproducts in the evidence for 
transmutations.

Eric


On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Stephen Cooke 
<stephen_coo...@hotmail.com<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I have a couple of questions that maybe some here can answer.

In the LENR context:

Are transmutations of elements and isotope evolutions for elements lighter and 
including Ni ever observed for heavier isotopes (I.e neutron rich isotopes)? Or 
only for those isotopes with fewer neutrons than ideally required for maximum 
stability.



Are the transmutations of elements for elements heavier heavier than Ni ever 
observed for lighter isotopes (I.e. Low Neutron isotopes)? Or only those 
isotopes with more neutrons than ideally required for maximum stability.




Re: [Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Jones Beene. I read Storms book about a year or so ago when I was still 
new to LENR. 

I should definitely take a look again now I have learnt a bit about the history 
and the developments from elsewhere too. Probably I could learn a lot more from 
reading it again now.

Thanks for pointing me there

Stephen

Sent from my iPhone

> On 14 Sep 2016, at 18:08, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> Yes, no, yes. This would be according to Storms' book, which devotes about
> 12 pages to transmutation. His coverage may not be completely correct but is
> there anything better?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Cooke 
> 
> I have a couple of questions that maybe some here can answer.
> 
> In the LENR context:
> 
> Are transmutations of elements and isotope evolutions for elements lighter
> and including Ni ever observed for heavier isotopes (I.e neutron rich
> isotopes)? Or only for those isotopes with fewer neutrons than ideally
> required for maximum stability.
> 
> 
> 
> Are the transmutations of elements for elements heavier heavier than Ni ever
> observed for lighter isotopes (I.e. Low Neutron isotopes)? Or only those
> isotopes with more neutrons than ideally required for maximum stability.
> 



[Vo]:A question about Heavy and light Isotopes and LENR.

2016-09-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
I have a couple of questions that maybe some here can answer.

In the LENR context:

Are transmutations of elements and isotope evolutions for elements lighter and 
including Ni ever observed for heavier isotopes (I.e neutron rich isotopes)? Or 
only for those isotopes with fewer neutrons than ideally required for maximum 
stability.



Are the transmutations of elements for elements heavier heavier than Ni ever 
observed for lighter isotopes (I.e. Low Neutron isotopes)? Or only those 
isotopes with more neutrons than ideally required for maximum stability.



RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-09 Thread Stephen Cooke
In case it is interesting to some I found this interesting presentation on soft 
Soft Gamma Repeaters and Magnetars.
http://www2011.mpe.mpg.de/363-heraeus-seminar/Contributions/3Wednesday/morning/KHurley.pdf

I appreciate that we are talking about very strong magnetic fields and rather 
specific conditions in neutron stars here but their may be some insights 
lurking in the data.
I did find the spectra of the rather broad and familiar looking spectra from 
the soft gamma sources interesting but that might be pure coincidence of 
course. Im curious where that broad spectra comes from. If it is a 
bremsstrahlung origin, a relativistic effect or some other cause.
here is another interesting link giving a good background:
http://solomon.as.utexas.edu/magnetar.html
And here is another very recent but possibly related article very bright X-ray 
sources that might or might not actually be related somehow. 
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Avoiding_traffic_jam_creates_impossibly_bright_lighthouse_999.html
Stephen

> From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 13:53:43 +0200
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
> 
> I wonder if the following linked recent paper can be interesting to some here 
> especially Axil and Eric?
> 
> http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10509-016-2830-0
> 
> It's concerning changes in beta decay rates in the presence of  magnetic 
> fields on magnetars.
> 
> I have so far only read the abstract but I think it could be interesting.
> 
> Stephen
  

RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-09 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Bob,
Here is another interesting paper on Magnetars:
http://cds.cern.ch/record/428499/files/9912301.pdf
I suppose this one could be particularly interesting to Axil maybe.
Stephen

From: frobertc...@hotmail.com
To: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 16:10:04 +











Revision/addition of recent message to Stephen--
 
Stephen—
 
I agree that the data from the magnetars are important.  It may be important in 
getting to a unified theory linking gravity and EM fields.   The absence of 
spectra may even identify dark matter—hydrinos for example.   Mills’s theory may
 see the light of day from magnetars.
 
The data, combined with the note from the recent Pam Mosier-Boss etal  paper 
summarizing the Pd-D work over the years for everybody—including for DOD 
presentation for Congress in a couple weeks—regarding super conductivity, is 
intriguing
 to say the least.  Alain’s (of Paris) early note about this paper being 
important is right on..
 
The large magnetic fields should make it possible to discern spin energy states 
associated with various nuclear species.  Their separation—differential 
energies—in a strong gravitational field may show how angular momentum 
associated with
 spin are linked to mass energy and hence gravity.  It may be that Plank’s 
quanta of angular momentum (h/2pi) is noticeably greater at the surface of a 
magnetar.   The study of such stars with different magnetic/gravitational 
fields will become the focus of
 cosmology soon, if not already the focus as you suggest—a hot topic.  
 
I continue to speculate that the coupling of spin energy to orbital spin energy 
states of electrons in a metal lattice is key to understanding how the LENR 
occurs without much normal 2-body high energy physics radiation—neutrons, gammas
 etc.   
 
Bob Cook
 
Sent from 
Mail for Windows 10
 

From: Bob Cook

Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 7:26 AM

To: Stephen Cooke; 
vortex-l@eskimo.com

Subject: RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

 





Stephen—
 
I agree that the data from the magnetars are important.  It may be important in 
getting to a unified theory linking gravity and EM fields.   The absence of 
spectra may even identify dark matter—hydrinos for example.  

 
Tis data combined with the note from the recent Pam Mosier-Boss paper 
summarizing the Pd-D work over the years for everybody—including for DOD 
presentation for Congress in a couple
 
Sent from 
Mail for Windows 10
 

From: Stephen Cooke

Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 1:34 AM

To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Subject: Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

 


Thank you very much for this link Bob. 



It looks like an interesting paper.



It looks like the phenomena on the surface of magnetars is a hot topic this 
year.



I wonder if this can be an effective data source forand analogue for 
conditions present in LENR? At the very least they should give some insight 
about the magnetic nature of physical processes involved in particle decays and
 interactions that may be applicable even in lower magnetic fields.



Perhaps the local magnetic field in a nucleus at fm distances has impacts on 
nucleon stability and decay rates either directly or through resonance 
phenomena, perhaps at quark level. 



If so it would be interesting to know if there can still be significant 
influence say at a few hundred fm if the magnetic moment and available energy 
states are high.



I wonder if their are any other interesting observational indicators on 
Magnetars it would be interesting maybe to see if the spectra can reveal the 
isotope ratios of elements. I suppose this might be easily possible for lighter
 elements and maybe due to the magnetic field from fine structure 
characteristics of the spectra. UV and X-Ray spectra could also be interesting 
especially if they can reveal something about the excitation state of the 
electrons in the atoms and the nucleus
 excitation states, as well as more macroscopic X-ray and RF radiation effects 
due to the plasma effects. Even though it's very different place and overall 
conditions than a LENR device, perhaps there are a lot of LENR physics 
analogues at macro scale that
 are applicable to LENR on micro scale that can be observed there.








On 07 Sep 2016, at 06:33, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:











Another free document regarding much of the same theory and data regarding 
reactions in high magnetic fields can be found here:
 
http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1603.01898
 
Note the importance of spin energy and the energy released by neutrinos; also 
the significant data regarding reaction parameters for mid-mass nuclei.
 
This adds to the idea of the large magnetic fields created locally by SPP’s on 
metal surfaces or lattice cavities.
 
Bob Cook
 
 
 
Sent from 
Mail for Windows 10
 

From: Stephen Cooke

Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2016 8

Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-08 Thread Stephen Cooke
Ahh I forgot to ask.., was the earlier posting about the paper you mentioned on 
magnetars here in Vortex-l or on the LENR forum by the way?


> On 07 Sep 2016, at 18:10, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Revision/addition of recent message to Stephen--
>  
> Stephen—
>  
> I agree that the data from the magnetars are important.  It may be important 
> in getting to a unified theory linking gravity and EM fields.   The absence 
> of spectra may even identify dark matter—hydrinos for example.   Mills’s 
> theory may see the light of day from magnetars.
>  
> The data, combined with the note from the recent Pam Mosier-Boss etal  paper 
> summarizing the Pd-D work over the years for everybody—including for DOD 
> presentation for Congress in a couple weeks—regarding super conductivity, is 
> intriguing to say the least.  Alain’s (of Paris) early note about this paper 
> being important is right on..
>  
> The large magnetic fields should make it possible to discern spin energy 
> states associated with various nuclear species.  Their 
> separation—differential energies—in a strong gravitational field may show how 
> angular momentum associated with spin are linked to mass energy and hence 
> gravity.  It may be that Plank’s quanta of angular momentum (h/2pi) is 
> noticeably greater at the surface of a magnetar.   The study of such stars 
> with different magnetic/gravitational fields will become the focus of 
> cosmology soon, if not already the focus as you suggest—a hot topic. 
>  
> I continue to speculate that the coupling of spin energy to orbital spin 
> energy states of electrons in a metal lattice is key to understanding how the 
> LENR occurs without much normal 2-body high energy physics 
> radiation—neutrons, gammas etc.  
>  
> Bob Cook
>  
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>  
> From: Bob Cook
> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 7:26 AM
> To: Stephen Cooke; vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
>  
> Stephen—
>  
> I agree that the data from the magnetars are important.  It may be important 
> in getting to a unified theory linking gravity and EM fields.   The absence 
> of spectra may even identify dark matter—hydrinos for example.  
>  
> Tis data combined with the note from the recent Pam Mosier-Boss paper 
> summarizing the Pd-D work over the years for everybody—including for DOD 
> presentation for Congress in a couple
>  
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 1:34 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
>  
> Thank you very much for this link Bob. 
> 
> It looks like an interesting paper.
> 
> It looks like the phenomena on the surface of magnetars is a hot topic this 
> year.
> 
> I wonder if this can be an effective data source forand analogue for 
> conditions present in LENR? At the very least they should give some insight 
> about the magnetic nature of physical processes involved in particle decays 
> and interactions that may be applicable even in lower magnetic fields.
> 
> Perhaps the local magnetic field in a nucleus at fm distances has impacts on 
> nucleon stability and decay rates either directly or through resonance 
> phenomena, perhaps at quark level. 
> 
> If so it would be interesting to know if there can still be significant 
> influence say at a few hundred fm if the magnetic moment and available energy 
> states are high.
> 
> I wonder if their are any other interesting observational indicators on 
> Magnetars it would be interesting maybe to see if the spectra can reveal the 
> isotope ratios of elements. I suppose this might be easily possible for 
> lighter elements and maybe due to the magnetic field from fine structure 
> characteristics of the spectra. UV and X-Ray spectra could also be 
> interesting especially if they can reveal something about the excitation 
> state of the electrons in the atoms and the nucleus excitation states, as 
> well as more macroscopic X-ray and RF radiation effects due to the plasma 
> effects. Even though it's very different place and overall conditions than a 
> LENR device, perhaps there are a lot of LENR physics analogues at macro scale 
> that are applicable to LENR on micro scale that can be observed there.
> 
> 
> 
> On 07 Sep 2016, at 06:33, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Another free document regarding much of the same theory and data regarding 
>> reactions in high magnetic fields can be found here:
>>  
>> http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1603.01898
>>  
>> Note the importance of spin energy and the energy released by n

Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-07 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thank you very much for this link Bob. 

It looks like an interesting paper.

It looks like the phenomena on the surface of magnetars is a hot topic this 
year.

I wonder if this can be an effective data source forand analogue for 
conditions present in LENR? At the very least they should give some insight 
about the magnetic nature of physical processes involved in particle decays and 
interactions that may be applicable even in lower magnetic fields.

Perhaps the local magnetic field in a nucleus at fm distances has impacts on 
nucleon stability and decay rates either directly or through resonance 
phenomena, perhaps at quark level. 

If so it would be interesting to know if there can still be significant 
influence say at a few hundred fm if the magnetic moment and available energy 
states are high.

I wonder if their are any other interesting observational indicators on 
Magnetars it would be interesting maybe to see if the spectra can reveal the 
isotope ratios of elements. I suppose this might be easily possible for lighter 
elements and maybe due to the magnetic field from fine structure 
characteristics of the spectra. UV and X-Ray spectra could also be interesting 
especially if they can reveal something about the excitation state of the 
electrons in the atoms and the nucleus excitation states, as well as more 
macroscopic X-ray and RF radiation effects due to the plasma effects. Even 
though it's very different place and overall conditions than a LENR device, 
perhaps there are a lot of LENR physics analogues at macro scale that are 
applicable to LENR on micro scale that can be observed there.



> On 07 Sep 2016, at 06:33, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Another free document regarding much of the same theory and data regarding 
> reactions in high magnetic fields can be found here:
>  
> http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1603.01898
>  
> Note the importance of spin energy and the energy released by neutrinos; also 
> the significant data regarding reaction parameters for mid-mass nuclei.
>  
> This adds to the idea of the large magnetic fields created locally by SPP’s 
> on metal surfaces or lattice cavities.
>  
> Bob Cook
>  
>  
>  
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2016 8:10 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
>  
> Hi Eric
> 
> You might be right and if so it will be interesting. Apart from the 
> interesting effects on the magnetic and electric fields I suppose those high 
> density fluctuations may couple with the soft x-ray radiation through 
> coupling with the plasma frequency if the electron density can get 
> sufficiently high enough to approach that of degenerate matter.
> 
> I wonder if there is a way we could measure those fluctuations externally 
> would there be apparent signature in the EMF or something?
> 
> Even though this paper is looking at quite extreme conditions with regards 
> the magnetic field the fact it affects the decay rates seems to indicate 
> something about how that decay works in general. I know similar studies have 
> also been performed on the decay of Neutrons in strong magnetic fields but 
> these would be free neutrons and so would probably align easier with the 
> external field.
> 
> Has any one identified what kind of magnetic field strengths we get in side a 
> nucleus with in a few fm of a Nucleon? And what its strength would be fort 
> her out at a few hundred fm or more?
> 
> I do appreciate this question is simplistic as I probably need to consider 
> the wave function in detail to understand the process and the implications of 
> all the possible spin and angular momentum states etc but I'm not up to speed 
> there unfortunately. So this is rather more a conceptual question regarding 
> the dipole magnetic field from a particle. 
> 
> Stephen
> 
> From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:56:18 -0500
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> Yes, modification of decay rates is a topic of great interest to me.
> 
> This is a theoretical paper, apparently working within the current 
> assumptions of physics.  In order for most LENR observations to be explained 
> by induced decay, I think that one or more of those assumptions will need to 
> be revisited somewhat. One example: how high the electron density can get for 
> short periods of time in metals under nonequilibrium conditions.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
> wrote:
> I wonder if the following linked recent paper can be interesting to some here 
> especially Axil and Eric?
> 
> http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10509-016-2830-0
> 
> It's concerning changes in beta decay rates in the presence of  magnetic 
> fields on magnetars.
> 
> I have so far only read the abstract but I think it could be interesting.
> 
> Stephen
> 


RE: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-06 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Eric
You might be right and if so it will be interesting. Apart from the interesting 
effects on the magnetic and electric fields I suppose those high density 
fluctuations may couple with the soft x-ray radiation through coupling with the 
plasma frequency if the electron density can get sufficiently high enough to 
approach that of degenerate matter.
I wonder if there is a way we could measure those fluctuations externally would 
there be apparent signature in the EMF or something?
Even though this paper is looking at quite extreme conditions with regards the 
magnetic field the fact it affects the decay rates seems to indicate something 
about how that decay works in general. I know similar studies have also been 
performed on the decay of Neutrons in strong magnetic fields but these would be 
free neutrons and so would probably align easier with the external field.

Has any one identified what kind of magnetic field strengths we get in side a 
nucleus with in a few fm of a Nucleon? And what its strength would be fort her 
out at a few hundred fm or more?
I do appreciate this question is simplistic as I probably need to consider the 
wave function in detail to understand the process and the implications of all 
the possible spin and angular momentum states etc but I'm not up to speed there 
unfortunately. So this is rather more a conceptual question regarding the 
dipole magnetic field from a particle. 
Stephen
From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:56:18 -0500
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Yes, modification of decay rates is a topic of great interest to me.
This is a theoretical paper, apparently working within the current assumptions 
of physics.  In order for most LENR observations to be explained by induced 
decay, I think that one or more of those assumptions will need to be revisited 
somewhat. One example: how high the electron density can get for short periods 
of time in metals under nonequilibrium conditions.
Eric

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
I wonder if the following linked recent paper can be interesting to some here 
especially Axil and Eric?



http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10509-016-2830-0



It's concerning changes in beta decay rates in the presence of  magnetic fields 
on magnetars.



I have so far only read the abstract but I think it could be interesting.



Stephen


  

[Vo]:Co59 Beta decay rates on Magnetar surface

2016-09-06 Thread Stephen Cooke
I wonder if the following linked recent paper can be interesting to some here 
especially Axil and Eric?

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10509-016-2830-0

It's concerning changes in beta decay rates in the presence of  magnetic fields 
on magnetars.

I have so far only read the abstract but I think it could be interesting.

Stephen


Re: [Vo]:New force couples electron to neutron

2016-05-26 Thread Stephen Cooke
Very interesting especially if a new force is implied. I do wonder though if 
the neutron cross- section is implicated somehow. This can also have a size 
several times that of the nucleus. Although Li7 has even number of neutrons 
which would have a neutron cross-section smaller than Li6 say

I guess they have considered that though, but maybe discounted it due to the 
interaction being with a proton.

I'm curious if a proton could look like a neutron to a nucleus though if it is 
interacting in some way with the electron orbitals of the Li7.

I previously wondered if this could lead to electron capture with the proton 
and conversion to a neutron, but perhaps stimulated positron emission could 
also be considered. 

Ok highly speculative I know and would need QM proof which I guess maybe does 
not work when fully considered but so is a fifth force is pretty speculative 
too ;)


> On 25 May 2016, at 18:36, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> Wow. This could definitely have implications for LENR.
>  
> Surprised there is not more mention of it in the science news.
>  
> SLAC has concluded that the particle could carry an extremely short-range 
> force that acts over distances only several times the width of an atomic 
> nucleus. This could be in the range of Holmlid’s claim for dense hydrogen.
>  
> From: Russ George
>  
> Here’s a lead on one of the great mysteries, just how is an electron coupled 
> to a neutron as clearly neutrons spit out electrons when they decay.  
> http://www.nature.com/news/has-a-hungarian-physics-lab-found-a-fifth-force-of-nature-1.19957
>  
> Of  course if ordinary neutrons hold on to ordinary electrons, albeit weakly, 
> that could explain more than a few mysteries.


Re: [Vo]:Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen.

2016-05-24 Thread Stephen Cooke
If I understand right, this idea from Lawandy seems compatible with some recent 
posts by Ecco on Quantum Heat so I think you may have something there. It will 
be interesting to see where it goes.


> On 23 May 2016, at 19:13, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> The answer to these questions varies wildly, according to the theorist. There 
> is little proof that can be called firm. The theory that appeals to me the 
> most is not Holmlid’s but the one of Lawandy. In that theory, there must be a 
> dielectric support for UDH, which is always paired. A larger cluster of pairs 
> is possible with no electrons – instead the charge is balanced by deflated 
> electrons captured in the dielectric. The paper is on the LENR-CANR site. 
> There is no “Rydberg matter” per se, but this dense state can be labeled as 
> IRH or inverted Rydberg hydrogen.
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> Oops i meant H(0) of course
> 
> Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen:
>  
> Is it possible for H(1) to exist as only one pair of atoms in dense form or 
> is a layer of additional pairs in a vortex is required to stabilise it?
>  
> Does anyone know if H(1) matter would contain stable electron orbitals, or 
> would the electrons be freely moving in a conduction band?
>  
> If it is possible to have a single pair and it has electron orbitals would 
> they look familiar? i.e. I suppose they would be external to the pair of 
> protons, would they there for look like orbitals from Helium atom with some 
> offset due to the different reduced mass due to lack of neutrons, and 
> different spin state of the nucleus? Or would they be more complex due to 
> dynamics of the proton pair?
>  
> Is there a reason the protons in the pair do not repel each other? is it 
> sufficient that the 2 elections stabilise them somehow or does it require 
> interactions with other pairs in the vortex to remain stable?
>  
>  


Re: [Vo]:Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen.

2016-05-24 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks for pointing me towards these theories Jones Beene I will try to take a 
look at them.

I have a few other questions about H(0) and D(0) to add to my earlier list if I 
may:

If the two nuclei are separated by 2.3 pm I suppose the are rotating about 
their center of mass. 

Would those nuclei generate Bremsstrahlung radiation or would they be in some 
kind of non radiating stable electron like orbitals, around the center of mass 
(i.e. Some kind of proton or nuclei orbitals rather than electron orbitals)?

Would the electron orbitals be perturbed by the dynamics of the paired nuclei?. 
A kind of 2.1 body problem. If so would this lead to photon radiation from the 
dynamic impacts on the electron orbitals?

Could the nuclei orbitals or orbits be comparable in magnitude in size to the 
slow neutron cross sections for those nuclei?

Is there something about the charge distribution of the pair of electrons in an 
S orbital with angular momentum 0, that allows the protons to orbit in a pair 
inside this orbitals?

Or do the protons or nuclei themselves form a kind of couper pair in there 
orbit state?

Could one nucleus influence the weak force interactions in the other nucleus 
when in these close configurations? I.e. Could one nucleus stimulate electron 
capture in the paired nucleus? And if so could the resulting neutron be 
captured?

What would be the effect on H(0) or D(0) if one of the electrons is excited to 
a higher orbital state such as a P1 orbital?

I guess if the electrons are in conduction bands half of these questions are 
irrelevant. Probably too many questions too with no answers so I apologize 
about that. I'm just curious if QM orbital modeling has explored any of these 
concepts.



> On 23 May 2016, at 19:13, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> The answer to these questions varies wildly, according to the theorist. There 
> is little proof that can be called firm. The theory that appeals to me the 
> most is not Holmlid’s but the one of Lawandy. In that theory, there must be a 
> dielectric support for UDH, which is always paired. A larger cluster of pairs 
> is possible with no electrons – instead the charge is balanced by deflated 
> electrons captured in the dielectric. The paper is on the LENR-CANR site. 
> There is no “Rydberg matter” per se, but this dense state can be labeled as 
> IRH or inverted Rydberg hydrogen.
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> Oops i meant H(0) of course
> 
> Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen:
>  
> Is it possible for H(1) to exist as only one pair of atoms in dense form or 
> is a layer of additional pairs in a vortex is required to stabilise it?
>  
> Does anyone know if H(1) matter would contain stable electron orbitals, or 
> would the electrons be freely moving in a conduction band?
>  
> If it is possible to have a single pair and it has electron orbitals would 
> they look familiar? i.e. I suppose they would be external to the pair of 
> protons, would they there for look like orbitals from Helium atom with some 
> offset due to the different reduced mass due to lack of neutrons, and 
> different spin state of the nucleus? Or would they be more complex due to 
> dynamics of the proton pair?
>  
> Is there a reason the protons in the pair do not repel each other? is it 
> sufficient that the 2 elections stabilise them somehow or does it require 
> interactions with other pairs in the vortex to remain stable?
>  
>  


RE: [Vo]:Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen.

2016-05-23 Thread Stephen Cooke
Oops i meant H(0) of course

From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 17:19:02 +0200
Subject: [Vo]:Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen.




Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen:
Is it possible for H(1) to exist as only one pair of atoms in dense form or is 
a layer of additional pairs in a vortex is required to stabilise it?

Does anyone know if H(1) matter would contain stable electron orbitals, or 
would the electrons be freely moving in a conduction band?
If it is possible to have a single pair and it has electron orbitals would they 
look familiar? i.e. I suppose they would be external to the pair of protons, 
would they there for look like orbitals from Helium atom with some offset due 
to the different reduced mass due to lack of neutrons, and different spin state 
of the nucleus? Or would they be more complex due to dynamics of the proton 
pair?
Is there a reason the protons in the pair do not repel each other? is it 
sufficient that the 2 elections stabilise them somehow or does it require 
interactions with other pairs in the vortex to remain stable?


  

[Vo]:Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen.

2016-05-23 Thread Stephen Cooke
Some questions about H(1) ultra dense hydrogen:
Is it possible for H(1) to exist as only one pair of atoms in dense form or is 
a layer of additional pairs in a vortex is required to stabilise it?

Does anyone know if H(1) matter would contain stable electron orbitals, or 
would the electrons be freely moving in a conduction band?
If it is possible to have a single pair and it has electron orbitals would they 
look familiar? i.e. I suppose they would be external to the pair of protons, 
would they there for look like orbitals from Helium atom with some offset due 
to the different reduced mass due to lack of neutrons, and different spin state 
of the nucleus? Or would they be more complex due to dynamics of the proton 
pair?
Is there a reason the protons in the pair do not repel each other? is it 
sufficient that the 2 elections stabilise them somehow or does it require 
interactions with other pairs in the vortex to remain stable?

  

RE: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

2016-05-23 Thread Stephen Cooke
In the interest of clarity hopefully:
Here is a link containing containerised mobile boilers which you might find 
interesting. I'm not yet clear if they are used inside buildings, Also they are 
for oil and gas boilers rather than electrical ones but I think you will agree 
there is a passing resemblance.
http://www.crosshire.ie/boilers/boilers.php
Also interesting there is a calculator for these kinds of boilers incase they 
are used purely for heating. i.e not some endothermic industrial purpose. I 
haven't gone through it for heating a warehouse say heating about 10 degrees 
above ambient though as I'm not sure of the volume. It might be interesting to 
do though
http://www.crosshire.ie/calculators/
I'm not sure but perhaps this is interesting too:
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/commercial_initiative/hvac_volume2_final_report.pdf
I suppose heating is not normally a big issue in Miami, but if it is needed for 
an industrial purpose and the heat is eventually released in the environment  
it is still interesting to consider its impact. I suppose the "thermal 
stratification" effects in buildings with high ceilings would also need to be 
considered, and also if the building is  effectively vented as discussed else 
where.

From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 20:09:44 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Alan Fletcher  wrote:
I accept your claim that 1MW in an un-ventilated, insulated room would be fatal.
But that is not the case : a 30,000 CPM is sufficient to ventilate it, and 
there is a fan (of similar dimensions to one particular example) on the roof. 
(Plus convective loss, which would reduce the need for ventilation).
Alan, you are missing the point!! Please read carefully:
Yes, if there is a 30,000 CPM fan in the customer room, and yes if it is 
running the temperature will not go up. THEREFORE, in order to prove the heat 
is real, Rossi has to show the I.H. expert this fan. The expert has to measure 
the air temperature and flow with an HVAC tool such as this one:
http://www.tequipment.net/ExtechAN200.asp

This confirmation is essential because Rossi's own calorimetry shows no excess 
heat.
This confirmation would be essential in any case, even if Rossi's calorimetry 
showed excess heat. No one is going to write a check for $89 million without 
taking every reasonable step to make sure the heat is real, and this is an 
important test to confirm that. You want to measure heat at the boiler, heat 
coming from the industrial equipment, and heat removed from the room by the 
ventilation equipment. These should be in reasonable agreement.
All large HVAC equipment has to be periodically tested for safety. When they do 
these tests, they measure the COP of the boilers, and they measure how well the 
chimney and fans are working. Anyone thinking of paying $89 million will demand 
the same kinds of tests.
 Rossi presented no calorimetric data to Lewan (see my separate thread), . . .
I heard he did, but I could be wrong about that. Rossi quoted enough numbers to 
allow a calculation of the fluid temperature. The numbers he quoted were the 
same as the sample I analyzed.
 Rossi filed his contract with IH with the court.  See sections 3(c) and 5 . . .
No, he did not. He is a fraud. His own data shows that his machine does not 
work. He tried to cover up additional proof of that by preventing access to the 
customer site.
 Rossi says  (and will presumably produce in court) that IH and JM signed off 
on a strict separation (double-black-box) policy.
JM is a shell company made by Rossi's lawyer. Their agreements mean nothing. 
Rossi had access to the facility.  There is NO evidence at all that ERV Penon 
is "Rossi's" man. 
Yes, there is. He is also a certified idiot. If he sticks around in the U.S. he 
will be twice an idiot, because he will probably end up in jail.
- Jed
  

Re: [Vo]:Relationship between Slow neutron capture cross section and neutron spallation energy

2016-05-20 Thread Stephen Cooke
Very interesting link too, I'm just reading it. Are you based in the 
Netherlands by any chance?

Sent from my iPad

> On 20 mei 2016, at 23:40, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
> 
> In reply to  Stephen Cooke's message of Fri, 20 May 2016 12:04:22 +0200:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>> Is there a relationship between the cross-section for slow neutron capture 
>> in particular nuclei and the nucleus excitation energy needed in the nucleus 
>> to cause neutron spallation?
>> 
>> For example B10 has a high neutron cross-section. Is there s relationship 
>> between this and the energy needed for Neutron spallation from B11?
> 
> That's what I would expect too. Nuclei with a high neutron capture 
> cross-section
> really "want" to have that extra neutron, because they become much more 
> stable.
> Conversely, removing the neutron from the new stable nucleus should be very
> difficult.
> Compare the neutron capture energy release with that of other nuclei. I would
> expect it to be larger.
> 
> In this case, 10B+n => 11B + 11.454 MeV
> 
> (That's a lot for a single particle capture reaction).
> 
> Another high capture cross-section reaction is:-
> 
> 3He+n => 4He + 20.578 MeV
> 
> which is why He3 is used in some neutron detectors.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk
> 
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> 



Re: [Vo]:Relationship between Slow neutron capture cross section and neutron spallation energy

2016-05-20 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Robin, 

> On 20 mei 2016, at 23:40, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
> 
> In reply to  Stephen Cooke's message of Fri, 20 May 2016 12:04:22 +0200:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>> Is there a relationship between the cross-section for slow neutron capture 
>> in particular nuclei and the nucleus excitation energy needed in the nucleus 
>> to cause neutron spallation?
>> 
>> For example B10 has a high neutron cross-section. Is there s relationship 
>> between this and the energy needed for Neutron spallation from B11?
> 
> That's what I would expect too. Nuclei with a high neutron capture 
> cross-section
> really "want" to have that extra neutron, because they become much more 
> stable.
> Conversely, removing the neutron from the new stable nucleus should be very
> difficult.
> Compare the neutron capture energy release with that of other nuclei. I would
> expect it to be larger.
> 
> In this case, 10B+n => 11B + 11.454 MeV
> 
> (That's a lot for a single particle capture reaction).
> 
> Another high capture cross-section reaction is:-
> 
> 3He+n => 4He + 20.578 MeV
> 
> which is why He3 is used in some neutron detectors.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk
> 
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> 



[Vo]:p and B11 colliding beam fusion

2016-05-20 Thread Stephen Cooke

Has this paper already been looked at here? apologies if it has. 

http://w3fusion.ph.utexas.edu/ifs/ifsreports/919_wong.pdf

The resonance proton cross-sections and proton beam energies in the 100's of 
keV range look interesting to me.


[Vo]:Relationship between Slow neutron capture cross section and neutron spallation energy

2016-05-20 Thread Stephen Cooke
Is there a relationship between the cross-section for slow neutron capture in 
particular nuclei and the nucleus excitation energy needed in the nucleus to 
cause neutron spallation?

For example B10 has a high neutron cross-section. Is there s relationship 
between this and the energy needed for Neutron spallation from B11?


Re: [Vo]:Details of the Thermacore runaway in 1996

2016-05-19 Thread Stephen Cooke
Wow so this triggered at room temperature? I wish we new more about this test 
and its products, especially with the hindsight of all that's been learnt in 
the 20 years since.

It's an interesting topic much needed now. I miss reading these scientific 
discussions on vortex-l.

Has any one tried to repeat the test? Maybe in a more controlled and safe 
environment?


> On 19 mei 2016, at 20:09, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> Most observers of the LENR/nickel hydride scene are unaware of the details of 
> the Thermacore, Inc. runaway reaction back in 1996.
> 
> Unfortunately, this was the last effort that this company made in the field, 
> and the main reason that they dropped LENR. The incident echoes other thermal 
> runaways, including P, Mizuno, Mark Snoswell in Australia and Ahern. 
> However, it was far more energetic than any of the prior incidents.
> 
> This was to have been an powered experiment but they never had time to apply 
> input power. This was was a follow-on to a Phase one grant from USAF 
> (document in LENR-CANR library) and was simply intended to be an analysis the 
> absorption reaction of a large amount of nickel powder and hydrogen at modest 
> pressure. Instead, it was likely the most energetic single event in the 
> history of LENR.
> 
> Recently, Brian Ahern has been in contact with Nelson Gernert, the chief 
> researcher in the new Thermacore (having gone through two changes of 
> ownership) who was also in charge of the runaway. None of this has appeared 
> in print before.
> 
> Gernert added 2.5 pounds of nickel powder (200 mesh of Ni-200) into a 3 liter 
> stainless steel Dewar.  The Dewar weighed 300 pounds. It was a strong 
> pressure vessel with a hemispherical volume. Thermacore evacuated the nickel 
> under vacuum for several days before adding H2 gas at 2 atmospheres 
> (apparently there was no potassium but this detail needs to be verified).
> 
> 
> The most amazing thing happened next. The powder immediately and 
> spontaneously heated before external power could be added. The Dewar glowed 
> orange (800C) and the engineers ran for cover. No external heat had been used 
> and no radiation monitors were running. The nickel had sintered into a glob 
> alloyed into the vessel and could not be removed.
> 
> 
> The (then) owner of Thermacore, Yale Eastman was frightened that an explosion 
> was imminent and that someone could be killed. He forbade any further work on 
> LENR. The incident was not published.
> 
> The Dewar was no longer safe as a pressure vessel and they junked it. They 
> did not measure it for radiation. Superficial thermal analysis - 3 liters of 
> H2 gas at 2 atmosphere will have a heat of combustion of 74 kilojoules when 
> combined with oxygen (but there was no oxygen in the Dewar).  
> 
> 
> Heating a 300 lb Stainless vessel to 800C requires 21 megajoules. That is 
> ostensibly 289 times the possible chemical energy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 10:44:35 -0400
> Subject: Re: MILLS AND THERMACORE
> From: na...@gwu.edu
> To: ahern_br...@msn.com
> 
> Thanks, Brian.
> 
> I will try to get a complete copy.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Brian Ahern  wrote:
> 
> aLL MY COPIES LACK PAGE 4.
> 


Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test

2016-05-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hello Jed
Have you ever looked at the pictures and technical description of the 1 MW ecat 
on this web site? It might save you some confusion.

http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-1-mw

Stephen


> On 16 mei 2016, at 23:18, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
>> We will all be taken to task for our assertions and speculations related to 
>> our credibility shortly as a result of the evidentiary discovery process 
>> that will occur during the trial. 
> 
> To hell we will! Lewan's interview with Rossi proves that I have been right 
> all along when I said Penon is an idiot and Rossi's methods are insane. 
> Anyone who would even suggest they should not investigate the customer 
> equipment is either crazy or a blatant fraud. This is as clear as it was when 
> Defkalion refused to allow DE to measure the flow rate, and kept tearing out 
> their instruments.
> 
> That one statement is all you need to know to see that this is game over, and 
> the test was a debacle.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-15 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed, 

I understood that he did indeed have 4 250 kW units in the container which he 
used for the test. The older 50 or so smaller units were also in the container 
as back up units but were never used in 1 year test, only the 250 W units were 
used apparently.

There are pictures I think on his website where you can see them, and you can 
also see their specifications on that site I think. 

Stephen



> On 15 mei 2016, at 22:47, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> Robert Dorr  wrote:
>  
>> Didn't Rossi switch from the small square 10kw boxes you refer to, to 4 
>> 250kw units.
> 
> I think there are 50 boxes in the latest unit, so that's 20 kW per box = 
> 1,000 kW.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-15 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Eric. 

From the specs I got the impression it was about 1 sq m (30x30x60 inches) but 
perhaps it was a component as it looks bigger in your picture. Still should fit 
in a container though. More interesting to me was the data about efficiency.

I wish there was an HVAC engineer who has worked with electric boilers on 
Vortex who could clarify. I would just like to understand what are the real 
constraints without perhaps incorrect speculation.

Stephen

> On 15 mei 2016, at 20:50, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> http://www.cleaverbrooks.com/Products-and-Solutions/Boilers/Electric/Model-IWH/Index.aspx
>> 
>> Would this not be equivalent to a 250 kW ecat unit?
> 
> The max is 350 kW.  Here is an image with a person to show the scale:
> 
> http://www.cleaverbrooks.com/uploadedImages/Internet_Content/Products_and_Solutions/Boilers/Electric/Model_IWH/PIX_Electric-IWH_03_401x329.jpg
> 
> The argument by the HVAC fellow about Rossi burning himself up in the 
> shipping container is a very interesting one.  But there are too few details 
> about the actual setup for me, personally, to draw any hard and fast 
> conclusions.  Maybe a second opinion would help, with someone playing devil's 
> advocate to poke at the expert's assumptions.
> 
> Eric
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-15 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hello Jed,

I'm clearly no expert and do not claim to be but there are interesting examples 
of electrical boilers on the Internet.

Here is an interesting link to a electrical water heater that seems comparable 
to an e-cat unit. 

http://www.cleaverbrooks.com/Products-and-Solutions/Boilers/Electric/Model-IWH/Index.aspx

Would this not be equivalent to a 250 kW ecat unit?

Please take a look at the electric brochure and electric boiler book

If I'm not wrong this unit is rated to 360 kW, is between 30x30x36 inches and 
60x34x40 inches in size (sorry metric sizes not given) not including clearances 
for pipe work etc, is 100% emission free and is near 100% efficient. 

There is a lot of detail given in the brochure but it seems in disagreement 
with what I understood you heard from your HVAC. The performance data on page 
30 seems particularly relevant and some of the following pages have interesting 
engineering information that maybe someone more expert understands. But I do 
not see why it could not be contained in a shipping container.

To me given my very limited knowledge in the field and unless I'm missing 
something this example makes the e-cat as a device in the container look 
credible. 

Stephen

> On 15 mei 2016, at 17:58, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> Robert Dorr  wrote:
>  
>> I just don't see why it is so difficult determining the COP of such a large 
>> system. As far as I can see you have to make a few measurements to get a 
>> very good idea of a thermal plants performance. . . .
> 
> It is not difficult when you stick to the ASME codes for instruments and 
> procedures. You have to a trained HVAC engineer to work with such large 
> equipment because it can be very dangerous. There are high voltages, high 
> temperature and so on. A rupture in a 1 MW steam pipe will kill people very 
> quickly, or critically burn them. I have seen an 80 kW factory boiler in 
> operation, with the steam vented. It is frightening! Steam pipe breaks in 
> ship engine rooms and steam locomotives were horrible accidents.
> 
> (My late father worked for 6 years in the engine room of a steamship launched 
> circa 1910, and he said there were dozens of ways to be killed or maimed by 
> the equipment. He was, in fact, maimed, which is why he left the merchant 
> marine did not see combat during WWII.)
> 
> The procedures are described by state laws in every state, but they are all 
> based on ASME recommendations.
> 
> The full set of boiler inspection procedures are difficult. They are 
> complicated. They include things like checking combustion efficiency, chimney 
> safety, emergency shutdown equipment, carbon monoxide levels and so on. Many 
> of them are over my head, but the ones relating to boiler efficiency are 
> fundamentally the same as laboratory-scale calorimetry, except on a much 
> larger scale. They are accurate but not precise by the standards of the 
> laboratory. I would say they are within 10%, judging by things such as the 
> lookup table range of values here, for example:
> 
> file:///home/chronos/u-1160197d37ec1500e70f021620dd3bae3f09f41c/Downloads/Boiler%20Efficiency%20Guide.pdf
> 
> See also:
> 
> http://www.nationalboiler.com/blog/uncategorized/ways-to-measure-industrial-boiler-efficiency/
> 
> https://www.asme.org/about-asme/who-we-are/standards/performance-test-codes
> 
> Measuring boiler efficiency is a critical part of the inspection. When a 
> boiler operates below rated efficiency, something is seriously wrong with it. 
> Such as incomplete combustion (smoke), or scale in the tank, or for various 
> other reasons. So this is always part of the inspection routine.
> 
> The state of Florida has their boiler inspection procedures online, but when 
> I last checked the links did not work. Look up some other state and you will 
> see what I mean. Or look at the Boiler Efficiency Guide I linked to above.
> 
> Anyway, to make a long story short, any professional who glances at Rossi's 
> configuration and data will say "there's no excess heat." Even I can do that. 
> It is obvious.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-15 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed

Thanks again for your patience with my questions. I know they were a bit basic 
but I wanted to clarify exactly the understanding. 

Most the thermal issues especially the waste heat are honestly over my head so 
I will leave that to experts.

If there is less than 20kW thermal output I suppose that is indeed concerning. 
Its surprising for us on the outside not seeing the data, and surprising it was 
not noted before by IH or the customer, but that topic is old ground now and 
something for the court to decide on. 

I hope we or if that's not possible at least some other mutually trusted LENR 
representatives as well as yourself get to see that data more clearly some day.

Stephen


> On 15 mei 2016, at 15:00, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> This is probably a naive question on my part, so I apologize for that. But 
>> in the interest of clarity I wonder if the definition of "excess heat" and 
>> "heat balance" is the same for all parties. I strongly expect it is of 
>> course.
> 
> As far as I know it is! I have not hear that Rossi has redefined this. It is 
> the ratio of output to input power. Suppose 20 kW of electricity goes in, 
> 1,000 kW comes out. That would be COP of 50, which is what Rossi claims. The 
> I.H. people say that less than 20 kW is coming out, because of heat losses.
> 
> In any conventional electrical or combustion heater, the COP is always less 
> than 1, because there are heat losses. In a heat pump, the COP can be higher 
> than 1, but that is not actually a violation of the laws of thermodynamics 
> (as some people imagine) because the surroundings outside the building grow 
> colder. The heat is moved, not generated.
> 
>  
>> It seems from what you said that the technicians measured heat from the 
>> device but apparently observed no excess heat due to LENR?
> 
> No excess heat from anything.
>  
>  
>> Is the heat balance the continuous heat provided by the plant regardless of 
>> input? External power or LENR? I.e balance over time?
> 
> I am not sure what you mean, but anyway, heat out always balances heat it. It 
> is just an electric heater, as far as anyone can tell. (Anyone other than 
> Rossi.)
> 
> 
>> Was 1MW heat power ever provided from external power alone?
> 
> No, that would not be possible. That takes a huge power supply transformer, 
> such as what you see behind a shopping mall. A 1 MW transformer is the size 
> of a pickup truck. This is just an ordinary warehouse facility.
> 
> I believe this is an image of a 1 MW transformer:
> 
> http://image.slidesharecdn.com/workshoponenergyandgridconnectionbasicssalford26-140115050535-phpapp02/95/workshop-on-energy-and-grid-connection-basics-salford-260613-72-638.jpg?cb=1389762849
> 
>  
>> If so was 1MW thermal heat output from the plant? Regardless of the energy 
>> source? 
> 
> Based on the data I have seen and the overall size and shape of the machine, 
> there is no way this thing could be putting out 1 MW.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-15 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed, 

This is probably a naive question on my part, so I apologize for that. But in 
the interest of clarity I wonder if the definition of "excess heat" and "heat 
balance" is the same for all parties. I strongly expect it is of course.

It seems from what you said that the technicians measured heat from the device 
but apparently observed no excess heat due to LENR?

Is the heat balance the continuous heat provided by the plant regardless of 
input? External power or LENR? I.e balance over time?

Or, Is the heat balance the ratio between the thermal heat expected from the 
electricity supplied alone and the thermal heat supplied from the plant? (I 
assume it is this one)

Was 1MW heat power ever provided from external power alone? before or during 
the test run, or was it run at a lower power level due to supply or engineering 
constraints?

If so was 1MW thermal heat output from the plant? Regardless of the energy 
source? 

Or did the thermal heat decrease in line and in proportion with any decrease in 
mains power?

Was the external power reduced significantly during the run?

If the decrease in input power was /6 or /50 say, Was the equivalent decrease 
in out put thermal power seen?

Or was there no decrease input power?

I'm sorry this is just for clarification to be sure (even tough I guess it's 
fairly obvious), that we have common understanding about what we mean  by 
"excess heat" and "power balance".

Stephen.

> On 15 mei 2016, at 00:59, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> Bob Cook  wrote:
> 
>> Adrian--
>> 
>> I think it is a simple as Rossi using his skill (art not IP) at operation 
>> and tuning the proper conditions which is not part of the IP he agreed to 
>> transfer.  IH technicians have not learned the art yet . . .
> 
> No, it is much simpler than that. Rossi could not make the machine produce 
> any excess heat. He had a year to try, but he failed. The I.H. technicians 
> measured the heat balance many times and found no excess heat.
> 
> That's all there to it.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Jed,

You are modest, but I know your understanding of Calorimetry far exceeds mine, 
and much of this is over my head so thanks for your patience. 

I suppose if the heater was immersed and surrounded by water the heat would 
either transfer through the water by conduction, convection or radiatively 
through IR. I suppose the water itself would not exceed 120 degC. Does the 
waste heat component mean that some of the IR transfers through the water and 
out of the device with out heating the water, or perhaps directly heating the 
container that then radiates slowly through the insulation? Hmmm... Does this 
impact the calorimetry? I wonder is that why IH question the results maybe?

If there was no IR leakage I suppose the water or steam flow through the 
container would still need to be pretty high to keep it in low temperature 
range though, I'm curious if those kind of flow rates are possible?, but I 
guess only an HVAC engineer or someone who builds boilers would know. 

Probably I should be patient and wait for HVAC reports if any are released. 

I guess/hope we don't need to wait too long now before things are resolved and 
hopefully become clearer.

Stephen



> On 14 mei 2016, at 20:43, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Regarding the waste heat, you mentioned that all the waste heat can't be 
>> transferred to the water? But surely if the heat source is inside the water 
>> tank it can only be transferred to the water. Isn't this how we do 
>> calorimetry?
> 
> Look at photos of the shipping container. It has shelves with 
> insulation-wrapped large metal boxes on them. Each box is a cold fusion 
> generator. Water flows into the boxes and then out from the shipping 
> container in a single pipe. At least, that was the configuration in Italy.
> 
> The boxes get hot internally, and some of the heat transfers to the water 
> flowing through. However, it cannot all transfer. Some of it radiates out 
> from the boxes to the inside of the shipping container. This is waste heat. 
> The insulation reduces it, but cannot eliminate it.
> 
> I am not capable of determining how much radiates, but an HVAC guy estimated 
> that if there is ~1 MW transferred to the water, there would have to be 
> several hundred kilowatts of waste heat. Here is a 6-burner 212,000 BTU/h (62 
> kW) restaurant stove:
> 
> http://www.therdstore.com/page/IFSES/GSTOVE/SR-6-36
> 
> That is much bigger and hotter than any stove at home, which typically have 4 
> burners totaling at most 40,000 BTU/h (12 kW). 212,000 BTU/h is 62 kW, so if 
> the waste heat if 300 kW (conservatively) that would be the equivalent of 5 
> restaurant stoves or 25 home stoves going full blast in large steel box, 
> making the box a large oven.
> 
>  
>> As long as the water tank was insulated for 120 deg C and the water or steam 
>> flow ensured this temperature was not exceeded I don't see why it would get 
>> hotter In the container.
> 
> The boxes would have be very hot inside to produce 1 MW of heat. There are 
> not many boxes. 50 as I recall. Each one has to produce 20 kW.
> 
>  
>> I suppose other kinds of boilers that have an external furnace for coal of 
>> gas this is not the case, as the furnace it self might be much hotter?
> 
> Yes, space heating and water heating furnaces heat sources are always much 
> hotter than the fluid. This is wasteful. It is an impedance mismatch.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed 

Regarding the waste heat, you mentioned that all the waste heat can't be 
transferred to the water? But surely if the heat source is inside the water 
tank it can only be transferred to the water. Isn't this how we do calorimetry? 
As long as the water tank was insulated for 120 deg C and the water or steam 
flow ensured this temperature was not exceeded I don't see why it would get 
hotter In the container. But perhaps I miss something simple like the flow rate 
is not sufficient or something? I suppose other kinds of boilers that have an 
external furnace for coal of gas this is not the case, as the furnace it self 
might be much hotter?

Stephen

> On 14 mei 2016, at 19:11, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jed, 
> 
> thanks for your extended reply, I'm also far from being able todo the HVAC 
> calculations so respect you have an experts input and are better informed 
> than me about what is possible.
> 
> Thanks also for the link rsbiomass.
> 
> To be fair the pictures of the Bosch plant I think we're for 38 MW or 19 MW 
> plants, so a little bit bigger than 1MW ;) I guess it also has to vent its 
> fuel exhaust somehow.
> 
> Of course these kind of boilers also include volume for the fuel burning, I 
> suppose the most comparable ones for LENR would be electrical.
> 
> I think there are better comparisons in the viessmann link which have smaller 
> boilers with different fuel including some close to 1MW.
> 
> I take you points about ventilation I'm also a little surprised we don't see 
> much, but am not enough of an expert to comment. I know electrical kilns I 
> have been near have been sometimes well insulated outside unless opened some 
> times other kilns I have been near not so much insulated but I suppose they 
> were not any where near the 1MW so it's difficult for me to compare.
> 
> Were the industrial heaters you were with before operating at higher 
> temperatures than 120 degC?
> 
> For further information about boilers that I think is interesting in the 
> context, here are a couple more links.
> 
> http://www.cleaver-brooks.com/Reference-Center/Resource-Library/Webinars/2014-Webinars/Boiler-Basics--Design-and-Application-Differences.aspx
> 
> http://www.nationalboiler.com/blog/industrial-boilers/4-ways-to-classify-types-of-industrial-boilers/
> 
> I agree the application is a puzzle, I'm curious to find out what it is some 
> day.
> 
> Thanks again for your earlier clarifications
> 
>> On 14 mei 2016, at 18:30, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Jed, I wonder if I'm missing something? You said a the 1 MW ecat plant 
>>> would cook people in the warehouse? I'm for sure no boiler expert but I 
>>> have recently checked on line and if we look at other boilers with other 
>>> heat sources it seems that steam boilers of MW size are rather typical for 
>>> industrial applications and are often accommodated in warehouses. The sizes 
>>> also seem to me to be comparable to the e-cat.
>> 
>> I think the e-cat is smaller than the boilers you showed in the linked 
>> document. It is a lot smaller than this 1 MW boiler as well:
>> 
>> http://rsbiomass.com/products/urbas-biomass-plant/biomass-boiler-plant/
>> 
>> The smaller the unit, the more intense the heat inside the shipping 
>> container.
>> 
>> Regarding this analysis, I am not capable of doing it either. This is what I 
>> heard from an HVAC engineer who examined the photos of the reactor and the 
>> warehouse. I cannot describe this in detail, because the analysis is over my 
>> head, and I do not have the exact numbers. Here is the gist of it:
>> 
>> In a factory using this much process heat, you need large ventilation 
>> equipment, which is not in evidence. Without that, the room would overheat 
>> enough to kill the occupants.
>> 
>> A typical use of process heat is for a dry cleaning shop, which uses 10 kW. 
>> So this is enough heat to operate 100 dry cleaning machines, which is far 
>> more equipment than you can fit into this building. There are factories with 
>> 100 times bigger equipment than a dry cleaning shop has, such as carpet 
>> mills, but those factories are big!
>> 
>> The inside of the shipping container would be like an oven, even with the 
>> doors wide open. I believe Rossi claims he spent hours inside it. The 
>> individual generators are wrapped in insulation, but there would still be 
>> hundreds of kilowatts of waste heat from them. It cannot all transfer to the 
>> water. Standing inside it would be like sitting

Re: [Vo]:LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed,

The kilns I have been near are smaller ones for ceramic crafts and artwork, but 
I wonder if something like this can be applicable.

https://www.vpbay.com/product/pellet-burner-kiln/

I'm far from knowledgable about industrial applications but I guess it's not so 
simple to match a boiler to this kind of device especially if it's different 
temperature ranges, but it shows the kind of thing that is possible.


> On 14 mei 2016, at 19:11, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jed, 
> 
> thanks for your extended reply, I'm also far from being able todo the HVAC 
> calculations so respect you have an experts input and are better informed 
> than me about what is possible.
> 
> Thanks also for the link rsbiomass.
> 
> To be fair the pictures of the Bosch plant I think we're for 38 MW or 19 MW 
> plants, so a little bit bigger than 1MW ;) I guess it also has to vent its 
> fuel exhaust somehow.
> 
> Of course these kind of boilers also include volume for the fuel burning, I 
> suppose the most comparable ones for LENR would be electrical.
> 
> I think there are better comparisons in the viessmann link which have smaller 
> boilers with different fuel including some close to 1MW.
> 
> I take you points about ventilation I'm also a little surprised we don't see 
> much, but am not enough of an expert to comment. I know electrical kilns I 
> have been near have been sometimes well insulated outside unless opened some 
> times other kilns I have been near not so much insulated but I suppose they 
> were not any where near the 1MW so it's difficult for me to compare.
> 
> Were the industrial heaters you were with before operating at higher 
> temperatures than 120 degC?
> 
> For further information about boilers that I think is interesting in the 
> context, here are a couple more links.
> 
> http://www.cleaver-brooks.com/Reference-Center/Resource-Library/Webinars/2014-Webinars/Boiler-Basics--Design-and-Application-Differences.aspx
> 
> http://www.nationalboiler.com/blog/industrial-boilers/4-ways-to-classify-types-of-industrial-boilers/
> 
> I agree the application is a puzzle, I'm curious to find out what it is some 
> day.
> 
> Thanks again for your earlier clarifications
> 
>> On 14 mei 2016, at 18:30, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Jed, I wonder if I'm missing something? You said a the 1 MW ecat plant 
>>> would cook people in the warehouse? I'm for sure no boiler expert but I 
>>> have recently checked on line and if we look at other boilers with other 
>>> heat sources it seems that steam boilers of MW size are rather typical for 
>>> industrial applications and are often accommodated in warehouses. The sizes 
>>> also seem to me to be comparable to the e-cat.
>> 
>> I think the e-cat is smaller than the boilers you showed in the linked 
>> document. It is a lot smaller than this 1 MW boiler as well:
>> 
>> http://rsbiomass.com/products/urbas-biomass-plant/biomass-boiler-plant/
>> 
>> The smaller the unit, the more intense the heat inside the shipping 
>> container.
>> 
>> Regarding this analysis, I am not capable of doing it either. This is what I 
>> heard from an HVAC engineer who examined the photos of the reactor and the 
>> warehouse. I cannot describe this in detail, because the analysis is over my 
>> head, and I do not have the exact numbers. Here is the gist of it:
>> 
>> In a factory using this much process heat, you need large ventilation 
>> equipment, which is not in evidence. Without that, the room would overheat 
>> enough to kill the occupants.
>> 
>> A typical use of process heat is for a dry cleaning shop, which uses 10 kW. 
>> So this is enough heat to operate 100 dry cleaning machines, which is far 
>> more equipment than you can fit into this building. There are factories with 
>> 100 times bigger equipment than a dry cleaning shop has, such as carpet 
>> mills, but those factories are big!
>> 
>> The inside of the shipping container would be like an oven, even with the 
>> doors wide open. I believe Rossi claims he spent hours inside it. The 
>> individual generators are wrapped in insulation, but there would still be 
>> hundreds of kilowatts of waste heat from them. It cannot all transfer to the 
>> water. Standing inside it would be like sitting on top of a conventional gas 
>> or electrically fired 1 MW heater, like the one you pointed to here:
>> 
>> http://www.bosch-industrial.com/files/BR_IndustrialBoiler_Beginners_en.pdf
>> 
>> I have been within 10 feet o

Re: [Vo]:LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed, 

thanks for your extended reply, I'm also far from being able todo the HVAC 
calculations so respect you have an experts input and are better informed than 
me about what is possible.

Thanks also for the link rsbiomass.

To be fair the pictures of the Bosch plant I think we're for 38 MW or 19 MW 
plants, so a little bit bigger than 1MW ;) I guess it also has to vent its fuel 
exhaust somehow.

Of course these kind of boilers also include volume for the fuel burning, I 
suppose the most comparable ones for LENR would be electrical.

I think there are better comparisons in the viessmann link which have smaller 
boilers with different fuel including some close to 1MW.

I take you points about ventilation I'm also a little surprised we don't see 
much, but am not enough of an expert to comment. I know electrical kilns I have 
been near have been sometimes well insulated outside unless opened some times 
other kilns I have been near not so much insulated but I suppose they were not 
any where near the 1MW so it's difficult for me to compare.

Were the industrial heaters you were with before operating at higher 
temperatures than 120 degC?

For further information about boilers that I think is interesting in the 
context, here are a couple more links.

http://www.cleaver-brooks.com/Reference-Center/Resource-Library/Webinars/2014-Webinars/Boiler-Basics--Design-and-Application-Differences.aspx

http://www.nationalboiler.com/blog/industrial-boilers/4-ways-to-classify-types-of-industrial-boilers/

I agree the application is a puzzle, I'm curious to find out what it is some 
day.

Thanks again for your earlier clarifications

> On 14 mei 2016, at 18:30, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jed, I wonder if I'm missing something? You said a the 1 MW ecat plant 
>> would cook people in the warehouse? I'm for sure no boiler expert but I have 
>> recently checked on line and if we look at other boilers with other heat 
>> sources it seems that steam boilers of MW size are rather typical for 
>> industrial applications and are often accommodated in warehouses. The sizes 
>> also seem to me to be comparable to the e-cat.
> 
> I think the e-cat is smaller than the boilers you showed in the linked 
> document. It is a lot smaller than this 1 MW boiler as well:
> 
> http://rsbiomass.com/products/urbas-biomass-plant/biomass-boiler-plant/
> 
> The smaller the unit, the more intense the heat inside the shipping container.
> 
> Regarding this analysis, I am not capable of doing it either. This is what I 
> heard from an HVAC engineer who examined the photos of the reactor and the 
> warehouse. I cannot describe this in detail, because the analysis is over my 
> head, and I do not have the exact numbers. Here is the gist of it:
> 
> In a factory using this much process heat, you need large ventilation 
> equipment, which is not in evidence. Without that, the room would overheat 
> enough to kill the occupants.
> 
> A typical use of process heat is for a dry cleaning shop, which uses 10 kW. 
> So this is enough heat to operate 100 dry cleaning machines, which is far 
> more equipment than you can fit into this building. There are factories with 
> 100 times bigger equipment than a dry cleaning shop has, such as carpet 
> mills, but those factories are big!
> 
> The inside of the shipping container would be like an oven, even with the 
> doors wide open. I believe Rossi claims he spent hours inside it. The 
> individual generators are wrapped in insulation, but there would still be 
> hundreds of kilowatts of waste heat from them. It cannot all transfer to the 
> water. Standing inside it would be like sitting on top of a conventional gas 
> or electrically fired 1 MW heater, like the one you pointed to here:
> 
> http://www.bosch-industrial.com/files/BR_IndustrialBoiler_Beginners_en.pdf
> 
> I have been within 10 feet of an 80 kW industrial heater in a factory. You 
> cannot get any closer than that. It is like standing next to an open fire. If 
> you were thrown against it or held above it, you would be scalded to death in 
> no time.
> 
> I do not think 1 MW is possible. These considerations reduce the possible 
> amount of excess heat, but they do not rule out excess heat. As I recall the 
> contract called for 6 times input. This is still plausible, I suppose. 
> However, the analysis of data by I.H. and by me (with a smaller dataset) rule 
> that out for other reasons.
> 
> 
>> I didn't get the impression from those sites that they are too hot for the 
>> warehouse.
> 
> I have been in factories and in ship engine rooms with equipment on this 
> scale. The spaces are much larger, or in the case of the engine rooms, the 
> venti

Re: [Vo]:LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

2016-05-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed, I wonder if I'm missing something? You said a the 1 MW ecat plant would 
cook people in the warehouse? I'm for sure no boiler expert but I have recently 
checked on line and if we look at other boilers with other heat sources it 
seems that steam boilers of MW size are rather typical for industrial 
applications and are often accommodated in warehouses. The sizes also seem to 
me to be comparable to the e-cat. I didn't get the impression from those sites 
that they are too hot for the warehouse. Perhaps I miss some details and a 
boiler engineer will add something.

In case it helps here are some links:

Note the first one deals mostly with "high pressure boilers" but makes a good 
list of typical applications,  where as the second one also gives some typical 
"low pressure steam boilers" that run with steam about 120 deg C. This does not 
sound too dissimilar to the 1MW ecat to me. Are you sure 1MW heat is so 
difficult to handle?

http://www.bosch-industrial.com/files/BR_IndustrialBoiler_Beginners_en.pdf

https://www.viessmann.com/com/content/dam/vi-corporate/COM/Download/Oil-gas-boilers-and-hot-water-boilers.pdf/_jcr_content/renditions/original.media_file.download_attachment.file/Oil-gas-boilers-and-hot-water-boilers.pdf
 
Of course we still need to see how the heat was applied in the e-cat case but 
maybe it was along the lines of one of the applications mentioned in the first 
link? I understand from your information that you have heard there was no 
application though, which I agree sounds strange.

> On 13 mei 2016, at 20:37, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> In his latest travesty of a blog, Peter Gluck wrote:
> 
>> "However I think his anger has a deeper cause- he is wanting or being pushed 
>> somehow to defend IH's very unnatural, surprising and implausible position 
>> so he has to tell difficultly believable things- he also does not know much 
>> about IH's real position , arguments and justifications. Do you agree, Jed?"
> 
> No, this is completely wrong in every respect, as I have pointed out many 
> times previously:
> 
> No one is pushing me.
> 
> There is nothing unnatural, implausible or unbelievable about I.H.'s claim. 
> Any person who understands calorimetry and examines the data will agree with 
> their analysis. If Rossi and Penon seriously believe there is 50 times output 
> they are both certified idiots (not just Penon).
> 
> As I said, several times, I have seen some of the technical data from the 
> calorimetry. Based on that, I am sure I.H. is correct, and Rossi is wrong. I 
> have also seen independent verification of this data from sources outside of 
> I.H., so I am sure it is real.
> 
> I know enough about I.H.'s "real position" regarding calorimetry to judge 
> this matter, although I look forward to learning more. I know nothing about 
> business arrangements or contracts.
> 
> I have enough information to judge these things with confidence. You, on the 
> other hand, know nothing about them. All you have to go on are Rossi's 
> assertions from his blog. These range from nonsense to impossible. The 
> information he already released in the lawsuit rules out his claims. If the 
> reactor were producing as much heat as he claims, he and the others in the 
> building would be cooked. They would be dead. In fact, it is not producing 
> any excess heat. If and when I.H. becomes free to publish the technical data, 
> everyone will see this, and you will see that Rossi has been playing you for 
> a fool.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Rydberg Matter and electron orbitals

2016-05-12 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Eric for this information.

Sent from my iPad

> On 12 mei 2016, at 03:46, Eric Walker  wrote:
> 
> With regard to excited electrons in non-s-shell orbitals, keep in mind the 
> precession of the orbital around the atomic center. I presume it will cause a 
> p-shell orbital to assume the shape of a torus.  It's like a quickly spinning 
> propellor -- imagine trying to get such a propellor to mesh with another, 
> similar propellor.
> 
> With regard to rydberg levels in general, keep in mind the dipole blockade 
> effect, in which one atom with an excited electron will prevent nearby atoms 
> from being in a similar state. [1] Imagine rubidium atoms trapped in an 
> optical trap.  Several of them might be excited to rydberg levels, whose 
> electrons extend out in exaggerated orbitals sufficiently far out to 
> encompass other atoms nearby.  These excited electrons keep the other atoms 
> in the ground state.
> 
> I have doubts about the rigor of research on purporting to demonstrate 
> rydberg matter.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.cqed.org/spip.php?article95=fr
> 


Re: [Vo]:Rydberg Matter and electron orbitals

2016-05-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
I am quite curious if it is the switch from a P orbital to and S orbital or 
visa versa is what causes it to switch to from H(1) to H(0). Perhaps the 
electrons still remain in an excited state in the other orbital.


> On 11 mei 2016, at 21:03, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Bob,
> 
> That it helps a lot I must admit I have a lot to learn about Rydberg matter. 
> Would these highly excited and Bohr atom like elliptical orbitals still 
> correspond to some kind of quantum mechanical orbital? Perhaps a highly 
> excited S orbital or something? Even highly excited P, D, F and G orbitals 
> would tend to have more complex shapes I think? I suppose it would depend on 
> the orbitals angular momentum. I suppose we might also need to consider the 
> spin as well as angular momentum though in the models if quantum mechanical 
> models are used. Perhaps at these energies the Bohr Model fits better the 
> observed behavior.
> 
> 
> On 11 mei 2016, at 20:05, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Stephen,  My understanding is that Rydberg hydrogen is highly excited 
>> hydrogen - it is just below an energy that the hydrogen would be ionized.  
>> In fact, small energy inputs to hydrogen in a Rydberg state will ionize it.  
>> As I understand the orbitals for Rydberg state hydrogen they are huge 
>> diameter flattened ellipsoids.  Because of this, it is not too far off to 
>> consider it like a Bohr model.  In Rydberg Matter (RM), all of the atoms 
>> have an electron in a large flattened ellipsoid shape which now loops some 
>> of the other nuclei in the RM to hold it together.  RM naturally forms as a 
>> large planar "snowflake", but can easily be warped in a field gradient.  RM 
>> is well characterized from its rotational spectrum.
>> 
>> OTOH, the ultra-dense form is nearly pure imagination at this point, based 
>> on very slim data.  If an ultra-dense form happens, how could it be formed 
>> from high energy matter like RM?  Normally the very small is only achieved 
>> when substantial energy is removed from the system.
>> 
>>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Stephen Cooke 
>>> <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Has anyone looked at RM from the point of view of quantum mechanical 
>>> electron orbitals? If so could you help me understand some crazy thoughts 
>>> and questions I have about it ?
>>> 
>>> I understand Rydberg hydrogen matter typically forms from excited hydrogen 
>>> atoms in some way.
>>> 
>>> Most literature seems to represent the electron orbits in Rydberg Hydrogen 
>>> in a classical Bohr electron shell representation.
>>> 
>>> What is the case in the quantum mechanical model? Are the electrons excited 
>>> to particular states such as S2 or P2 orbitals? I suppose the electrons are 
>>> more easily excited to P2 from the S1 orbital if excited by photon 
>>> absorption for example.
>>> 
>>> Does the type of RM depend on the type of orbitals the electrons are in? 
>>> For example using Holmlid definitions is a S2 more likely to form H(1) type 
>>> RM and P2 more likely to form H(0). Naively looking at the dumbbell shape 
>>> of P2 orbitals does this allow closer approach of the nuclei than say S2 
>>> with its spherical orbital?
>>> 
>>> I think it's not so straight forward though as I think in Holmlid's recent 
>>> paper he mentions the orbital angular momentum (l) in each state. 
>>> Particular electron orbital types have particular orbitals. S orbitals have 
>>> l=0, P orbitals have l=1 etc. however he mentions that H(0) and D(0) have 
>>> l=0 and H(1) and D(1) have l>0. This is the opposite than I suggested above 
>>> suggesting that in fact the S orbitals allow the more compact configuration 
>>> of RM and P and other Orbital types can form normal RM.
>>> 
>>> On another matter are the orbitals themselves affected in the dense form of 
>>> H(0) bearing in mind the very close spacing if the nuclei a few pm compared 
>>> to the normal S1 orbital radius? Also does the vortex nature of the close 
>>> combinations of atomic pairs into threads impact the electron orbitals?
>> 


Re: [Vo]:Rydberg Matter and electron orbitals

2016-05-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Bob,

That it helps a lot I must admit I have a lot to learn about Rydberg matter. 
Would these highly excited and Bohr atom like elliptical orbitals still 
correspond to some kind of quantum mechanical orbital? Perhaps a highly excited 
S orbital or something? Even highly excited P, D, F and G orbitals would tend 
to have more complex shapes I think? I suppose it would depend on the orbitals 
angular momentum. I suppose we might also need to consider the spin as well as 
angular momentum though in the models if quantum mechanical models are used. 
Perhaps at these energies the Bohr Model fits better the observed behavior.


> On 11 mei 2016, at 20:05, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Stephen,  My understanding is that Rydberg hydrogen is highly excited 
> hydrogen - it is just below an energy that the hydrogen would be ionized.  In 
> fact, small energy inputs to hydrogen in a Rydberg state will ionize it.  As 
> I understand the orbitals for Rydberg state hydrogen they are huge diameter 
> flattened ellipsoids.  Because of this, it is not too far off to consider it 
> like a Bohr model.  In Rydberg Matter (RM), all of the atoms have an electron 
> in a large flattened ellipsoid shape which now loops some of the other nuclei 
> in the RM to hold it together.  RM naturally forms as a large planar 
> "snowflake", but can easily be warped in a field gradient.  RM is well 
> characterized from its rotational spectrum.
> 
> OTOH, the ultra-dense form is nearly pure imagination at this point, based on 
> very slim data.  If an ultra-dense form happens, how could it be formed from 
> high energy matter like RM?  Normally the very small is only achieved when 
> substantial energy is removed from the system.
> 
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Has anyone looked at RM from the point of view of quantum mechanical 
>> electron orbitals? If so could you help me understand some crazy thoughts 
>> and questions I have about it ?
>> 
>> I understand Rydberg hydrogen matter typically forms from excited hydrogen 
>> atoms in some way.
>> 
>> Most literature seems to represent the electron orbits in Rydberg Hydrogen 
>> in a classical Bohr electron shell representation.
>> 
>> What is the case in the quantum mechanical model? Are the electrons excited 
>> to particular states such as S2 or P2 orbitals? I suppose the electrons are 
>> more easily excited to P2 from the S1 orbital if excited by photon 
>> absorption for example.
>> 
>> Does the type of RM depend on the type of orbitals the electrons are in? For 
>> example using Holmlid definitions is a S2 more likely to form H(1) type RM 
>> and P2 more likely to form H(0). Naively looking at the dumbbell shape of P2 
>> orbitals does this allow closer approach of the nuclei than say S2 with its 
>> spherical orbital?
>> 
>> I think it's not so straight forward though as I think in Holmlid's recent 
>> paper he mentions the orbital angular momentum (l) in each state. Particular 
>> electron orbital types have particular orbitals. S orbitals have l=0, P 
>> orbitals have l=1 etc. however he mentions that H(0) and D(0) have l=0 and 
>> H(1) and D(1) have l>0. This is the opposite than I suggested above 
>> suggesting that in fact the S orbitals allow the more compact configuration 
>> of RM and P and other Orbital types can form normal RM.
>> 
>> On another matter are the orbitals themselves affected in the dense form of 
>> H(0) bearing in mind the very close spacing if the nuclei a few pm compared 
>> to the normal S1 orbital radius? Also does the vortex nature of the close 
>> combinations of atomic pairs into threads impact the electron orbitals?
>> 
>> 
> 


[Vo]:Rydberg Matter and electron orbitals

2016-05-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Has anyone looked at RM from the point of view of quantum mechanical electron 
orbitals? If so could you help me understand some crazy thoughts and questions 
I have about it ?

I understand Rydberg hydrogen matter typically forms from excited hydrogen 
atoms in some way.

Most literature seems to represent the electron orbits in Rydberg Hydrogen in a 
classical Bohr electron shell representation. 

What is the case in the quantum mechanical model? Are the electrons excited to 
particular states such as S2 or P2 orbitals? I suppose the electrons are more 
easily excited to P2 from the S1 orbital if excited by photon absorption for 
example.

Does the type of RM depend on the type of orbitals the electrons are in? For 
example using Holmlid definitions is a S2 more likely to form H(1) type RM and 
P2 more likely to form H(0). Naively looking at the dumbbell shape of P2 
orbitals does this allow closer approach of the nuclei than say S2 with its 
spherical orbital?

I think it's not so straight forward though as I think in Holmlid's recent 
paper he mentions the orbital angular momentum (l) in each state. Particular 
electron orbital types have particular orbitals. S orbitals have l=0, P 
orbitals have l=1 etc. however he mentions that H(0) and D(0) have l=0 and H(1) 
and D(1) have l>0. This is the opposite than I suggested above suggesting that 
in fact the S orbitals allow the more compact configuration of RM and P and 
other Orbital types can form normal RM.

On another matter are the orbitals themselves affected in the dense form of 
H(0) bearing in mind the very close spacing if the nuclei a few pm compared to 
the normal S1 orbital radius? Also does the vortex nature of the close 
combinations of atomic pairs into threads impact the electron orbitals?




Re: [Vo]:Re: Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

2016-05-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Jed for replying, I can appreciate its not easy taking your stance and 
that it's difficult for you to explain things from this view point. Especially 
when you can't discuss some things you know about the current context and have 
to instead draw on older material to which you had concerns about at the time 
but previously gave the benefit of the doubt. 

We should try to relax I think,trust the due process and allow everything to be 
considered and let things run their course. All will become clearer in time, 
hopefully eventually all kinds of LENR tech and spin off tech will benefit 
somehow from what is done now and once all things are considered perhaps have a 
strong and accepted basis.


> On 11 May 2016, at 16:08, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jed, do you know what the temperature of the steam was? 
> 
> I know practically nothing about this device. Rossi never described it. Jim 
> Dunn never got a chance to evaluate it, because Rossi threw him out. There 
> are some photos of it at Krivit's site but no detailed descriptions.
> 
> You should talk to Jim for details. There is no point to asking Rossi.
> 
> The venture capitalists assisted by NASA experts were offering Rossi $15 
> million as I recall. Rossi refused to do a proper demo for them after the 
> first one nearly blew up. He said he "did not have time." That's pathological.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

2016-05-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed, do you know what the temperature of the steam was? 

I understood you mentioned that Jim said the pressure also rose, but I wonder 
if it was at air pressure if it might have explained the lack of apparent steam 
vapour? If the steam was much hotter than 100 deg C  at air pressure it would 
be relatively less dense. Once it entered the atmosphere it would disperse in 
the air and cool relatively quickly and contract in volume due to the ideal gas 
law I suppose. If so I suppose any vapour would be quite thin and dispersed and 
maybe turbulent and be relatively difficult to see compared to steam from a 
kettle say and not have high velocity high density output such as from a 
pressure cooker? This is also consistent I think with the video I saw (was it 
with Steve Krivit?) where a device was being demonstrated. Perhaps I'm wrong 
I'm not a boiler engineer and only considering it from a Physics point of view 
and I apologize if I made a wrong assessment there. Perhaps a boiler engineer 
who deals with high temp steam at air pressure knows better. Could it be they 
initially thought this was the status so and only later saw higher pressure 
indicating a blockage which meant terminating the test?

It's interesting that the room was full of steam after they switched off the 
device this could be consistent with the steam still flowing at air pressure at 
lower temperature near 100 deg C especially if there was no damage to the 
device. It seems to imply that the steam was flowing when it cooled and the 
blockage disappeared at that point?

Do you know if the steam was directly from a tank in the device or from an out 
put from a pipe of a heat exchanger?

I wasn't there so don't know what really occurred and can only speculate but I 
can imagine both sides being frustrated and upset with the situation rather 
than the people involved if something like that happened especially with so 
much was at stake. It would be easy to
make wrong assumptions about the reactions on both sides in this case.

The test and your comments have maybe highlighted something important though. 
Even devices where pressure is supposed to be low at air pressure might in some 
contingency case need a safety valve or some other way to automatically shut 
down incase of blockages or other unexpected behavior etc. This could be 
important for replicators or other LENR experimenters to bear in mind in future 
testing.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 11 May 2016, at 02:04, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> a.ashfield  wrote:
> 
>> "No, it was just debris or something. This sort of thing happens with 
>> experiments."
>> 
>> It would require BOTH the inlet and outlet to be blocked.
> 
> Good point. Maybe it was just a boil-off reactor? I do not know. Jim said the 
> outlet was blocked so the temperature and pressure were rising. You should 
> ask him for details.
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]:Proposed Satellite Meeting to the 43rd EPS Meeting on Plasma Physics on LENR

2016-05-04 Thread Stephen Cooke
Great looks like a promising meeting. I hope it gets positive attention, I feel 
maybe the time is right but we will see.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 04 May 2016, at 15:30, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> See:
> 
> https://kuleuvencongres.be/eps2016/scientific-program/satellite_meeting


Re: [Vo]:Next Big Future - goes out on a limb

2016-04-14 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Jed,

Do you or your contact know by any chance who initially introduced the ERV to 
the project? Was it AR, IH, or someone else? It seems his role was not for the 
public verification of the plant but rather as an independent arbitrator 
between IH and AR. 

There have been a lot of assumptions here that the ERV and AR were previously 
acquainted. Is that really the case? It maybe I suppose and if so I guess IH 
agreed.

It seems from recent exchanged he was selected by both IH and AR from the very 
beginning and had the job of overseeing and evaluating all the tests for IH and 
AR as a kind of referee.

Even woodford seem to have been involved much earlier than we originally 
thought and say they did due diligence. Did they have any independent ERV?

Wouldn't it make sense to have ERV who understood Italian I think given its 
AR's mother tongue?

Any way I prefer to look at information and try to see facts rather than judge 
on hearsay. I especially look deeper than the surface when I feel someone is 
attacked by mob culture. Accusation by a mob is different than being guilty in 
my opinion, and some one being difficult to get along with does not make them 
wrong or guilty they can be very good and smart too. I do respect and consider 
intelligent people's points of view on both sides. Especially where like you 
they are very likely better informed than me in their view point. 

I do think where there is doubt it's for the court to settle now. I think both 
sides are intelligent to follow this route. I don't think it's in the interest 
of either side to pressure them into releasing information before they are 
ready to give it. Although like all us following LENR I have huge curiosity is 
to see and know what is in there. 



> On 14 Apr 2016, at 05:40, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
>> The value and quality of the ERV report is subjective, But in any contest 
>> where the referee is agreed upon beforehand.
> 
> This is not a sporting event.
> 
>  
>> If the referee makes a call that one side does not agree with, that 
>> aggrieved party cannot take their ball and go home no matter how incompetent 
>> the referee is. You take the loss with good sportsmanship and pay the 89M.
> 
> You have no idea how business is conducted, or how contracts are disputed. If 
> the "referee" in this case issues a judgement call which is physically 
> impossible and which any credentialed expert agrees is nonsense, NO ONE WILL 
> EVERY PAY $89 MILLION. Nothing like that ever happened in the history of 
> business, and never would happen. That would be lunacy. Suppose Penon had 
> claimed the thing produces 100 MW, or a gigawatt? Do you think they should 
> pay up in that case? Suppose he said it produces more power than the sun? How 
> impossible does the claim have to become before you concede that a business 
> should not have to pay on the basis of a wild, absurd, untenable claim made 
> by an idiot? What would stop Rossi from handing Penon $10 million in a bribe?
> 
> - Jed
> 


Re: [Vo]: MFMP GS5.3 - a replication

2016-04-12 Thread Stephen Cooke
This small band of engineers and makers thinkers and analysts are doing amazing 
and very important work. They are a true fellowship holding on to an ideal for 
LOS, independent and thorough testing and open discussion and analysis, doing 
something for all people. This is so important in these times. Good luck to all 
of you. And thanks for sharing your amazing work.

> On 11 Apr 2016, at 20:35, Bob Higgins  wrote:
> 
> Alan Goldwater, Bob Greenyer, Skip Reynolds, and Mark Jurich (hope I didn't 
> miss anyone there) have begun a replication of the GS5.2 experiment, deftly 
> named GS5.3.  The experiment is in the early phases of heat treatment of the 
> Ni powder I believe.  The live video feed links can be found at:
> 
> http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/11/mfmp-team-starts-new-live-glowstick-experiment/
> 
> Admittedly, at this stage it it as exciting as watching paint dry.  We are 
> all hoping for a repeat performance of the "signal", the gamma burst output.  
> In GS5.3, the team is much better prepared to monitor the radiations.  Time 
> bases for all of the data acquistions have been carefully synchronized.  
> Amptek has generously loaned MFMP an X-123 CdTe x-ray spectrometer capable of 
> about 6keV to 80keV measurement.  Mark Jurich has borrowed an x-ray 
> scintillator system from SLAC to monitor.  The GM detector has been upgraded 
> to a sensitive 2" pancake detector.  I believe they also have the Optris 
> camera running.  If the signal pixie makes an appearance, it will definitely 
> be in the limelight.  
> 
> The experiment will be running continuously for several days to come.  It 
> takes a team to monitor such an experiment over so long a period.
> 
> Jones, can you elaborate on Holmlid's call for replication?
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>> From: Bob Higgins
>> 
>> 
>> Since the Rossi/IH announcements, Vortex-L has been deluged with useless and 
>> boring posturing and insulting angry remarks.  In a month we will all wonder 
>> why we wasted so much of our collective time - like waving fans in the 
>> vacuum of space to improve the convective cooling. 
>> 
>> Bob - I agree with you – and especially now that Alan has a new experiment 
>> underway. Have you any new info on that?
>> 
>> Everyone seems to have made their positions clear. There will be another 
>> predictable round of posturing when IH files their answer, but let’s move on 
>> to science.
>> 
>> Ólafsson is calling for replications of the Holmlid effect. That is another 
>> great place to start.
>> 
> 


RE: [Vo]:UDH, UDD, degenerate matter and white dwarf stars

2016-04-06 Thread Stephen Cooke
Here is another interesting link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_binary
White dwarf are in fact quite faint and the radiation is normally attributed to 
left over energy from gravitational collapse.
X-ray stars are much brighter at X-ray wavelengths than optical wavelengths.
Xray stars as mentioned in the above link and acquire matter from a companion 
star. The x-rays are thought to be generated when that matter falls in towards 
the white dwarf star, it is thought to radiate from the accretion disc.
There is something else I'm wondering about though: If white dwarfs are made of 
degenerated matter their plasma frequency will be quite high in the 10s keV 
range. This would mean that the matter is only transparent to light with 
frequencies higher than the plasma frequency. This would be in the X-ray 
region. Below this frequency the light will not propagate and instead be 
evanescent an perhaps lead to bulk plasmon effects in the material. Only on the 
surface of the white dwarf above the degenerate layer would UV, optical and 
lower frequencies be emitted. I wonder if this has a part to play in X ray 
emissions from white dwarfs.

From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 14:39:25 +0200
Subject: [Vo]:UDH, UDD, degenerate matter and white dwarf stars




If UDD and UDH is actually equivalent to electron degenerate matter it might be 
similar to the materials proposed to form white dwarf stars:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_matter
White dwarfs are thought to no longer have fusion and associated radiation 
pressure to prevent collapse but instead rely on pressure from degenerate 
electrons to support their volume and stop them collapsing further.
I wonder if the type of reactions seen by Holmlid could occur in white dwarfs. 
If so is there a characteristic signature that we could expect to see from 
white dwarfs? 
White dwarfs are known to emit X-rays for example in some cases for example 
when they are young or when they absorb material from another binary star 
leading to Nova. Could the signature of these emissions indicate some kind of 
LENR? 
Could characteristic emissions associated with Kaon or pion decay be observed?
Could characteristic emissions from charged particles such as pions, muons or 
kaons in a magnetic field be observed?
Charactersitic emissions of short lived particles could be an interesting 
signature to try to explain.

  

[Vo]:UDH, UDD, degenerate matter and white dwarf stars

2016-04-06 Thread Stephen Cooke
If UDD and UDH is actually equivalent to electron degenerate matter it might be 
similar to the materials proposed to form white dwarf stars:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_matter
White dwarfs are thought to no longer have fusion and associated radiation 
pressure to prevent collapse but instead rely on pressure from degenerate 
electrons to support their volume and stop them collapsing further.
I wonder if the type of reactions seen by Holmlid could occur in white dwarfs. 
If so is there a characteristic signature that we could expect to see from 
white dwarfs? 
White dwarfs are known to emit X-rays for example in some cases for example 
when they are young or when they absorb material from another binary star 
leading to Nova. Could the signature of these emissions indicate some kind of 
LENR? 
Could characteristic emissions associated with Kaon or pion decay be observed?
Could characteristic emissions from charged particles such as pions, muons or 
kaons in a magnetic field be observed?
Charactersitic emissions of short lived particles could be an interesting 
signature to try to explain.
  

RE: [Vo]:Rossi and IH have received the ERV Report

2016-03-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks for the thought provoking post… I agree. 
Group think and consensus can be more powerful, more widespread and more 
damaging than any planned or determined conspiracy. People identify with and 
feel part of a social/political group or organisation and go along with what 
they think their peers think. Sometimes even when they sense it is wrong they 
will even go along with it if they feel it is the easy course or if they 
benefit in some way, financially, or through peer group acceptance. To some 
extent they can avoid feelings of responsibility or guilt too by feeling they 
go along with the consensus and do not disrupt established ways of thinking.
When I see group think I want to look deeper, and find what is hidden behind 
the assumptions. Almost always i find the group thinking is based on wrong 
assumptions and incomplete or incorrect information. 
But perhaps I'm also guilty of my own kind of group think. I tend to seek out 
places and other people who I feel ask questions and look deeper too.
hmmm i need to think about that.


From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 08:28:51 +0200
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi and IH have received the ERV Report
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

On the opposite for a conspiracy theorist, in general, there is no 3rd party, 
except himself.Anyone who disagree with the conclusion is considered part of 
the giant conspiracy.
There is no absolute third party as interest and incentive connect, in both 
positive and negative direction, all players.NB: people forget often the 
non-third party player who have incentive not to accept reality (eg: an 
academic of an UL who would prefer to pretend uncertainty while there is none, 
just to save his reputation, or avoid he have been wrong before - see Tajmar 
and EmDrive )
however if nobody is totally third party, the fact to participate to a fraud, 
ask for a really high level in commitment with the fraudster, and increase the 
chance of leak for each new member in the conspiracy.
My conclusion is that there is no conspiracy except when public, authorities, 
powerful actors, reference actors, ask for it and punish the traitors.The only 
conspiracy is a consensus. there is public whistleblowers who are ignored, and 
mindguards who punish them to challenge the public consensus. This is not a 
conspiracy but a groupthink, mutual assured delusion as Benabou name it.
now apply my theory to LENR domain, or to other subject, and things get 
clearer...
2016-03-30 3:27 GMT+02:00 Daniel Rocha :

Rossi's definition of 3rd party is somewhat exotic.


  

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

2016-03-23 Thread Stephen Cooke
I'm not sure about stimulate decay by Neutron spallation of these very stable 
nuclei as this would require huge energies normally associated with high energy 
particle collisions, (unless those energies can be reached by accumulation or 
resonance somehow). I guess this is your point also.
I do wonder however if Ni63 is present if it would be confused with CU63 in the 
SIM's analysis. Although CU63 is stable and Ni63 is not Ni63 has a long 
half-life of 101 years and low beta emission energy with a very low intensity 
at maximum energy around 66.9keV, an average emission energy of around 17keV 
and a peak intensity at even lower energies. These low energies of beta 
emission makes me think the beta emission from Ni63 might be very difficult to 
detect and easily blocked. 
If Ni63 does occur through some process and it can absorb a proton to form Cu64 
perhaps it leads a way to breed Ni64 via Cu64 decay via ec or beta+ emission.


> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 18:00:39 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel
> From: hveeder...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or
> radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate
> detectable neutrons and other radioactive isotopes.
> On the other hand if 64Ni decayed to 62Ni by first decaying to 63Ni,
> then 63Ni should be detectable since it has a half life of about 100
> years.
> 
> Harry
> 
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> > Iron-nickel meteorites can contain high levels of heavy nickel (64Ni).
> >
> > In space debris analyzed at U of Chicago, an increase of ~500‰ excess in
> > 64Ni has been found in samples. This is about the level of the heavy nickel
> > which Parkhomov used in the Sochi paper. We are trying to find out where his
> > nickel came from since it must have been natural and he was unaware.
> >
> > The main Fe/Ni alloy that makes this natural kind of enrichment happen is
> > called kamacite. The process is called “fractionation” and it requires
> > millions of years in space to happen. Of course, to balance things out,
> > there is another distinct alloy in iron meteorites which often has low
> > levels of heavy nickel, and it is call taenite. The first kamacite was found
> > at Meteor Crater, Arizona and it is common all over the world. There are
> > occasional listings on eBay for kamacite, but the expected level of
> > enrichment is not known.
> >
> > When meteorites are heated and cooled and subjected to magnetic fields as
> > they orbit the sun, heavy nickel migrates from taenite to kamacite. Thus,
> > there is a known way that enrichment in heavy nickel can occur naturally and
> > probably something similar could happen with in an industrial setting with
> > zone refining – should it be shown that 64Ni is the active isotope.
> 
  

Re: [Vo]: E-Cat progress

2016-03-22 Thread Stephen Cooke
@Jones Beene, Yup I agree I also find the neutron model hard to swallow for the 
same reasons you mentioned. Which is why I still prefer some kind proton 
capture at this time.

I just have a hunch they may both be right with their respective mixes some 
how, however but I agree experiment is the best arbitrator... Perhaps there is 
a way with proton capture too if there is some stimulation, but I need to think 
it through.

It's interesting what you say about some nickel containing higher 
concentrations of Ni64 it makes me wonder about the nucleosynthesis aspects 
given its source. 

Was there any chance Parkhomov was using some preprocessed fuel, that was 
already used in earlier experiments? Or is it clearly said it comes from the 
unprocessed powder?

As you say it will be interesting to see if Ni64 is more significant than we 
previously thought.


> On 23 mrt. 2016, at 00:04, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> But Stephen – what you suggest would involve neutron irradiation … which 
> would activate much more than the nickel, if that was the main channel. Since 
> there is no secondary activation, neutrons are probably out (except as 
> something like Hagelstein’s neutron “hopping” which is speculative).
>  
> I am content to tackle each problem in succession. First, let’s find what 
> works, and then after we get that far - try to find out why it works. There 
> have been way too many null results with plain nickel and LAH, so we have a 
> handle on what is insufficient. And the only thing that Parkhomov has added, 
> at Sochi, is the 64Ni… which could be huge. If we find that either enrichment 
> in 62 or 64 improves the thermal gain, or as you suggest “both” of them work, 
> then we move on to “why”… but I have a feeling that it will not involve 
> neutrons.
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> @Jones Beene. Are you sure that they are not both correct? You said something 
> interesting about the medical use of Ni62 and how both Ni62 and Ni64 form 
> radio active isotopes Ni63 and Ni 65 if irradiated by neutrons. Could this be 
> part of the process some how? For the LENR device maybe Ni65 is not such a 
> problem. And perhaps beta radiation from these sources enhances LENR some 
> how. The different half lives might also explain a higher concentration of Cu 
> 65 than Cu 63 in the ash if present. We would expect to have beta produced 
> from the Ni63 however which has a half life of 100 years a Qvalue of 66.9 keV 
> and a beta radiation energy with a few of maximum energy 66.9 keV an average 
> around 17keV and a peak at lower energies. It would imply a neutron process 
> rather than proton capture though and although other opinions may differ I 
> currently think the latter is more likely.
>  
> 
> On 22 mrt. 2016, at 17:32, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> From: Bob Higgins
>  
> Ø  Interestingly, what MFMP found in the assay of its 62Ni sample was that 
> the fraction of 64Ni in the enriched sample was not increased.
>  
> This is not surprising. The main use of the 62 isotopes appears to be 
> medical. The online information suggests that the starting isotope needs to 
> be relatively free of 64 since it will be irradiated by the medical center 
> into dedicated radioactive isotopes for cancer treatments and so forth.  A 
> process to convert Ni62 to Ni63 (Ni63 is the desired long-lived beta isotope) 
> by neutron irradiation would not be able to accommodate much Ni64 since the 
> heavy isotope is converted into a short-lived species, which is too 
> destructive for use in medicine.
>  
> Unfortunately for MFMP, this means that if the Parkhomov data is correct, the 
> increase in Ni62 in the fuel of Alan Goldwater will NOT be of much help for 
> seeing excess heat. Bummer, because this stuff is expensive.
>  
> If that scenario turns out to be the case, then my condemnation of Rossi is 
> precisely why we need to be vigilant, and point out the problems of relying 
> on a pathological liar for scientific information. Rossi has a long and 
> sordid history of deceit – even if he is not cheating now. This was evidenced 
> in the TEG work and the two “convenient” laboratory fires, etc. etc.
>  
> OTOH – if Rossi is found not be cheating in this instance, in addition to an 
> apology from me, MFMP may have the success they deserve to find with the 
> Rossi-isotope which they have obtained at substantial cost. It will be 
> interesting to see which way the evidence falls. Experiment rules! Data rules!
>  
> Again - Rossi and Parkhomov cannot both be correct and the truth is in the 
> data.
>  
> You pretty much have to choose in advance, since one of them is wrong. 
> Apparently most readers of this forum think Rossi is honest, but the day of 
> reckoning in

Re: [Vo]: E-Cat progress

2016-03-22 Thread Stephen Cooke
@Jones Beene. Are you sure that they are not both correct? You said something 
interesting about the medical use of Ni62 and how both Ni62 and Ni64 form radio 
active isotopes Ni63 and Ni 65 if irradiated by neutrons. Could this be part of 
the process some how? For the LENR device maybe Ni65 is not such a problem. And 
perhaps beta radiation from these sources enhances LENR some how. The different 
half lives might also explain a higher concentration of Cu 65 than Cu 63 in the 
ash if present. We would expect to have beta produced from the Ni63 however 
which has a half life of 100 years a Qvalue of 66.9 keV and a beta radiation 
energy with a few of maximum energy 66.9 keV an average around 17keV and a peak 
at lower energies. It would imply a neutron process rather than proton capture 
though and although other opinions may differ I currently think the latter is 
more likely.


> On 22 mrt. 2016, at 17:32, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> From: Bob Higgins
>  
> Ø  Interestingly, what MFMP found in the assay of its 62Ni sample was that 
> the fraction of 64Ni in the enriched sample was not increased.
>  
> This is not surprising. The main use of the 62 isotopes appears to be 
> medical. The online information suggests that the starting isotope needs to 
> be relatively free of 64 since it will be irradiated by the medical center 
> into dedicated radioactive isotopes for cancer treatments and so forth.  A 
> process to convert Ni62 to Ni63 (Ni63 is the desired long-lived beta isotope) 
> by neutron irradiation would not be able to accommodate much Ni64 since the 
> heavy isotope is converted into a short-lived species, which is too 
> destructive for use in medicine.
>  
> Unfortunately for MFMP, this means that if the Parkhomov data is correct, the 
> increase in Ni62 in the fuel of Alan Goldwater will NOT be of much help for 
> seeing excess heat. Bummer, because this stuff is expensive.
>  
> If that scenario turns out to be the case, then my condemnation of Rossi is 
> precisely why we need to be vigilant, and point out the problems of relying 
> on a pathological liar for scientific information. Rossi has a long and 
> sordid history of deceit – even if he is not cheating now. This was evidenced 
> in the TEG work and the two “convenient” laboratory fires, etc. etc.
>  
> OTOH – if Rossi is found not be cheating in this instance, in addition to an 
> apology from me, MFMP may have the success they deserve to find with the 
> Rossi-isotope which they have obtained at substantial cost. It will be 
> interesting to see which way the evidence falls. Experiment rules! Data rules!
>  
> Again - Rossi and Parkhomov cannot both be correct and the truth is in the 
> data.
>  
> You pretty much have to choose in advance, since one of them is wrong. 
> Apparently most readers of this forum think Rossi is honest, but the day of 
> reckoning in nigh. If the active isotope is ascertained by Goldwater not to 
> be 62Ni – the good news would be that there are nickel mines which have high 
> Ni64 content naturally and it will not be as expensive.
>  
> The likely source of AP‘s fuel, which was enriched by a factor of over 400%, 
> is one of these mines. One might suspect that Rossi knows this too, and he 
> has already stockpiled a lot of the nickel supply which is naturally enriched 
> in 64Ni. That is why he has stated on his blog that the active nickel will 
> not cost more than normal.
>  
> This scenario also reinforces the notion that Rossi cheated at Lugano in 
> order to hide his knowledge of the active isotope - so as to keep the price 
> from sky-rocketing… as well as keeping competitors at bay by sending them on 
> a wild goose chase with 62Ni.
>  
>  
>  


[Vo]:Lev Berstein patent: US 20140192941 A1?

2016-03-22 Thread Stephen Cooke
Has this patent from Lev Berstein been reviewed here?
Is he a known player in LENR?
I found this patent online:
Method of acceleration of nuclear transmutation of isotopes by carrying out 
exothermic reactions US 20140192941 A1
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140192941
which on brief reading looks like it could be relevant.



  

[Vo]:photobeta decay

2016-03-19 Thread Stephen Cooke
I recently came across the concept of photobeta decay.
Photoneutron or Photoproton decay is a well known process which occurs when 
very high MeV photons of sufficient energy and characteristics interact with 
nuclei and can result in the emission of Protons or Neutrons providing the 
associated Q value for emission is reached.
Photobeta decay is a similar process whereby a photon of sufficient energy and 
characteristics interact with and can result in the emission of Beta providing 
the associated Q value for emission is reached. 
Photobeta decay was looked at in the 1960's by P. B Shaw, D.D. Clayton and F.C. 
Michel as a possible process occurring in the Nucleosynthesis process in Red 
Giant stars  and has been used along with the r-process and s-process of 
neutron capture to explain the element abundances of some heavier elements. I 
have not found many literature of photobeta decay in other more recent contexts 
though. Obviously the core of a red Giant is not a normal environment so it 
maybe a bit special there.
These papers are paywalled unfortunately but the second one you see part of it 
in preview
http://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.140.B1433
http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1134%2F1.1788033
I wonder if something similar can occur in more normal environments or in LENR 
active sites etc.
Some elements have quite low Q values for beta decay, these include Ni63 for 
example which has a Q value of 66.977 keV and decays with a long half-life of 
101 years to Cu63 which is stable. Cu63 then has a correspondingly low negative 
Q value of -66.977 keV for Beta + decay or Electron capture. Since all Q values 
for Cu63 are negative it is normally stable.
(note Ni63 is not a natural abundant element of Nickel due to its half life of 
101 years)
It has been reported that we may get broad spectrum X-ray radiation in some 
devices such as seen by MFMP in their GS 5.2 experiment. This spectra is 
bremsstrahlung like in that it has low intensity at high energies and increases 
to much higher intensities at lower energies especially from around 100 keV and 
below.
I wonder what happens to these nuclei with low + and - Q values when they are 
in this kind of broad spectrum environment including X rays at 66.955 keV? 
Could Ni63 be stimulated to beta decay at a faster rate that half-life of 101 
years?Could normally stable Cu63 be stimulated to compensate for the -Q of 
-66.977 keV and undergo Beta + decay or electron capture?
If this strange scenario is possible then we could the Ni63/Cu63 effectively 
cycle thereby generating energetic beta by absorbing gamma or X-rays of 66.977 
keV?
One way to check for this I suppose is to see if any Ni63 was present in the 
ash (perhaps by detecting Beta radiation with a Q value of 66.977 keV). There 
are not many normal possible sources of Ni63: If proton absorption is occurring 
with Ni62 then it would form Cu63 which is normally stable. If Neutron 
absorption occurs then it could also be possible generated from neutron 
absorption in Ni62 but then maybe we would expect other elements or isotopes to 
have consistent signatures of neutron absorption. 
If Ni63 and/or Cu63 can undergo Photobeta decay (a big if admitably) some other 
elements and isotopes with Q values below 100 or so keV could be implicated.
Such as:
Pb210/Bi210 : Qbeta = 63.486 keV (side note: this is a Radon 
Progeny)Pd107/Ag107: Qbeta = 34.078 keV (side note: Ag 107 is stable and has a 
isomer at 93.125 keV) H3/He3: Qbeta = 18.591 keV
There are several more < 100 keV and many more < 500 keV
Interestingly at frequencies below 100 keV they are also close to the K alpha 
and K beta characteristic X-Ray emission frequencies from the inner shell 
electron transitions of some heavier elements such as Tungsten (W)







  

[Vo]:Collision Cascades and Electron Phonon Coupling

2016-03-12 Thread Stephen Cooke
Bearing in mind the recent finding of high energy Bremsstrahlung like spectra 
by MFMP and references to 100 keV stimulation elsewhere in the literature. I 
wonder if Collision cascades of ions can become important in these systems. 
They usually become relevant with ion collisions of a few 10s keV or more and 
will generally lead regions with defects and vacancies in the material. When 
they are caused by high energy events (MeV) they can generate longer lived heat 
spikes that are cooled and damped by electron phonon coupling (EPC). EPC is 
quite high in certain metals in particular Iron, Nickel, palladium and Platinum 
due to the high number of electrons at the fermi level in these metals.
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_cascade

In the Wiki article it implies the coupling between Collision Cascades and EPC 
is not well understood.

I found a paper though that seems to imply the effect of cooling due to EPC is 
less than expected:

http://www.acclab.helsinki.fi/~knordlun/pub/Nor98.pdf

This paper does not look a LENR but more at the effect from a materials point 
of view but I thought it interesting though for LENR too. On one hand the 
defects caused by Collision Cascades might benefit LENR during material 
preparation, on the other hand EPC may play a role in the active phase, 
converting collision cascades from ion interactions into beneficial phonons 
that may enable proton absorption or cooling heat spikes

Just some thoughts. Has it come up before here?


Re: [Vo]:Re: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

2016-03-12 Thread Stephen Cooke
Many thanks Axil it's a very good paper and both you and Mark in your two 
responses answered my questions very well.

It's very very interesting that Hawking radiation could be generated from 
plasmons in this way. 

I still need to study it in detail but I notice that they say that these 
cavities can work with light of any frequency not just infra red and optical is 
in normal lasers. Does this literally mean it can absorb high energy gamma as 
well? Or are they emphasising it can work at other higher frequencies than IR 
and Optical but not necessarily up to gamma.

I'm curious because as far as I can see with normal plasmons the plasma 
frequency is a few eV 15 eV for Nickel for example. This may be increased 
slightly if the nickel atoms are heavily ionised some how but still would be In 
the 10 or low 100s eV maximum. This is due to the sqrt relationship electron 
density in metals. Even if we take Dirac plasmons into account and the material 
is generating 2D or 1D electron flow the plasma frequency drops slightly due to 
a more reduced effect of the electron density. So wouldn't plasmons not absorb 
photons above the plasma frequency energy?

If what I say above is correct then only degenerate materials such as occur in 
White dwarf stars would have sufficient electron density to have a plasmon 
frequency in the 1 keV or 10s keV range maybe up to a hundred or so keV range 
maximum.

Interestingly it could be that UDH and UDD with atomic separations of a few pm 
could maybe have sufficient electron density for this. This might be important 
to Holmlids. Results if UHD is implicated directly or if it surrounds nano 
clusters thereby containing  emissions below a few 10s keV within. This could 
be important for K shell electron stimulation, auger X Ray emission or nucleus 
stimulation effects. 

(I wonder if UDH and UDD is in some way a little piece of a white dwarf star! 
;) ) 

But if I understand right even degenerate matter would not absorb gamma in the 
MeV range.

Is this correct or is the absorption due to another process or is the electron 
density enhanced massively somehow due to cavitation I wonder. Or is it only a 
analogue black hole to light below these plasma frequency frequencies? To be 
fair probably I need to study the paper more to fully understand what I am 
missing.

Even lower energy plasma frequency and light absorption could be important even 
if it extends only to low energy X-rays or UV. And similar Hawking radiation 
effects could still be relevant. This could also still have an impact on 
electron transmission emission from atoms and absorption perhaps leading to 
atomic scale stimulation effects especially in the bulk. Or Bremsstrahlung at 
the most intense low energy frequencies perhaps leading to electron plasma 
thermal excitation.

> On 12 mrt. 2016, at 07:48, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> http://www.nature.com/articles/srep02607
> 
> Cavity Optical Pulse Extraction: ultra-short pulse generation as seeded 
> Hawking radiation
> 
> This article shows how a Dark Mode optical cavity (which is what an SPP 
> really is) can absorb light and store it, then later release it as Hawking 
> radiation (heat) at a latter time. The optical cavity acts as a black hole. 
> 
> I say that all these "Dark Mode" objects share a dualism with the 
> astronomical black hole which allows them to do unexpected things like 
> catalyze LENR. 
> 
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Hi Axil a couple of quick questions?
>> 
>> Was it confirmed the pulse was only a few seconds? I thought they only 
>> spotted it in the spectrum at the end of longer session but are not sure 
>> exactly when and how long it lasted once initiated?
>> 
>> I have been trying to find papers and references on high energy gamma 
>> absorption by SPP... I suppose your dark mode plasmons could you point me to 
>> a reference? Also Does it require degenerate matter to form or some other 
>> method? I know you have circulated a lot of documents and background on the 
>> broader ideas about SPP but is there is one you recommend that specifically 
>> on these points?
>> 
>> Thanks Stephen
>> 
>>> On 11 mrt. 2016, at 23:16, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Something must produce those electrons and that something (Alpha. beta} 
>>> produces EMF energy at a well defined gamma level.
>>> 
>>> Bright mode release of "photons" from SPPs when they decay...before an SPP 
>>> BEC becomes active. 
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Axil--
>>>> 
>>>> Bremsstrahlung radiation is due to inel

Re: [Vo]:Re: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

2016-03-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks Mark, 

That makes it clear and sounds like a good analysis. I will certainly stay 
tuned and am looking forward to the re-runs greatly. You are making very good 
and thorough analysis.

Stephen

> On 12 mrt. 2016, at 00:45, Mark Jurich <jur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>   Stephen Cooke wrote:
>   “Was it confirmed the pulse was only a few seconds? I thought they only 
> spotted it in the spectrum at the
>end of longer session but are not sure exactly when and how long it lasted 
> once initiated?”
>  
> We (MFMP/myself) believe that there was a few second burst about 3 minutes at 
> the end of Spectrum #7.
> The evidence for this is circumstantial.  We know that the Power Analyzer 
> “hiccupped” for a few seconds
> (3 or 4) then recovered at this time.  We also know that Spectrums #8 had 
> some residual radiation, suggesting
> that the emissions continued for at least 3 or 4 minutes.  We also see 
> something in Spectrum #10,
> later.
>  
> We know that in Spectrum #7, there was a significant rise in “pulse overlap” 
> hence the burst hypothesis.
>  
> Until we replicate, we will not be able to really pin all this down.
>  
> I hope this helps clarify what is currently known. Stay tuned.
>  
> - Mark Jurich


Re: [Vo]:Re: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

2016-03-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Axil a couple of quick questions?

Was it confirmed the pulse was only a few seconds? I thought they only spotted 
it in the spectrum at the end of longer session but are not sure exactly when 
and how long it lasted once initiated?

I have been trying to find papers and references on high energy gamma 
absorption by SPP... I suppose your dark mode plasmons could you point me to a 
reference? Also Does it require degenerate matter to form or some other method? 
I know you have circulated a lot of documents and background on the broader 
ideas about SPP but is there is one you recommend that specifically on these 
points?

Thanks Stephen

> On 11 mrt. 2016, at 23:16, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> Something must produce those electrons and that something (Alpha. beta} 
> produces EMF energy at a well defined gamma level.
> 
> Bright mode release of "photons" from SPPs when they decay...before an SPP 
> BEC becomes active. 
> 
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:
>> Axil--
>> 
>> Bremsstrahlung radiation is due to inelastic scattering of electrons as they 
>> pass through matter.  There are no resonances.  The radiations occurs as a 
>> result of an electron changing direction as a result of the electric field 
>> it is passing through.  This change in direction (acceleration) saps energy 
>> from the kinetic energy of the free electron and distributes that energy as 
>> electromagnetic radiation equivalent to the loss of kinetic energy of the 
>> electron.   The spectrum is random photons because the distance and charge 
>> of particles being encountered by an energetic electron is random.  Thus the 
>> forces on the electron, whether due to other lattice electrons or positive 
>> charges in the lattice are random in magnitude.
>> 
>> Landau distributions of the energy of photons do not apply to free electrons 
>> unless they are at relativistic velocities and have an effective mass like a 
>> proton, pion, alpha or other heavy particle.
>> 
>> What do you consider is the likely mechanism producing the  "Landau 
>> distribution" you suggest?  Specifically, what particles are involved in the 
>> generation of the spectrum?
>> 
>> Bob Cook
>> 
>> -Original Message- From: Axil Axil
>> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 10:19 AM
>> To: vortex-l
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Bremsstrahlung experimental note
>> 
>> The seconds long MFMP X-ray burst is smooth and demonstrates no
>> resonance energy peaks caused by the interaction of electrons with
>> matter. The MFMP burst is strictly a release of photons in a random
>> energy distribution.
>> 
>> A Landau distribution is what we are seeing in the MFMP radiation
>> plot. It is the release of energy by particles based on a random
>> release process. This is seen when a particle gives up its kinetic
>> energy to a thin film as the particles interact randomly with the
>> matter in the thin film.
>> 
>> If SPPs are releasing their energy based on a random timeframe and/or
>> based on a random accumulation amount, a Landau distribution of energy
>> release will be seen.
>> 
>> You might see a Landau distribution if there is a random mixing of
>> both low energy photons (infrared) and high energy photons (gamma's
>> from the nucleus);
>> 
>> Such mixing is produced by Fano resonance, where an SPPs are being fed
>> by both infrared photon pumping and nuclear based gamma photon
>> absorption.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>> Electrons may have nothing to do with the x-ray radiation.
>>> 
>>> The radiation could be produced by photon based quasiparticles.
>>> 
>>> The LENR reaction might start with Surface Plasmon Polaritons
>>> initiated nuclear reactions and then after thermalization, the decay
>>> of those SPPs. When the SPPs decay, they release their energy content
>>> as photons of varng energies,
>>> 
>>> After a second or two, a Bose condensate of these SPPs form and the
>>> energy of the photons are released as hawking radiation which is
>>> thermal.
>>> 
>>> The radiation seen only lasts for a second.
>>> 
>>> In LENR we get either high energy radiation (x-rays) or heat; not
>>> both. This is based on the temperature of the reactor. A cold reactor
>>> produces X-Rays because of weak SPP pumping..
>>> 
>>> The SPP absorbs nuclear binding energy and stores it in a whispering
>>> gallery wave (WGW) in a dark mode. The energy is stored inside the WGW
>>> until the WGW goes to a bright mode when the SPP decays. This
>>> conversion from dark mode to bright mode happens in a random
>>> distribution.
>>> 
>>> When the temperature is raised over a thermal conversion limit, a BEC
>>> is formed where the stored nuclear binding energy is released from the
>>> SPP BEC as hawking radiation which is thermal.
>>> 
>>> 
 On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:
 The effectiveness of the SS can at stopping any high energy electrons 

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung, characteristic X-Ray's Rydberg matter and Ions

2016-03-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
Sorry a couple of time I said nuclei but I meant atoms. This is about electron 
atom interactions not nucleus excitations.

Sent from my iPad

> On 11 mrt. 2016, at 23:33, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm wondering if there is an explanation for clean Bremsstrahlung emissions 
> with out characteristic X-Rays apart from Axil's interesting explanation 
> (which maybe the correct one) of broad spectrum emissions from SPP. 
> 
> First some well known background about Bremsstrahlung that I'm sure you are 
> all familiar with:
> 
> If we do have Bremsstrahlung radiation due to high energy electrons this will 
> radiate photons with a broad range of frequencies with a range starting and 
> rising very quickly to a peak intensity at frequencies near the plasma 
> frequency in the material then decreasing to zero intensity at frequencies 
> corresponding to the energy of the kinetic energy Q value of the electrons. 
> 
> The plasma frequency in metals is typically in the UV region maybe 5 to 20 eV.
> 
> The Q value depends on the energy of the source electrons or beta and can 
> vary a lot in energy depending on the source energy they can be a 10s keV but 
> can also be even be at very high energies corresponding to very hard X-rays 
> at gamma frequencies say to 1.5 MeV or more for example, especially if due to 
> a nuclear source such as beta decay.
> 
> The highest emission intensity however will typically be between the plasma 
> frequency and a few tens or hundreds keV.
> 
> Thermal distribution and relativistic effects on the electron energies can 
> also have a small effect on the on the photon emission profile.
> 
> Normally interactions of Bremsstrahlung electrons with atoms can lead to 
> characteristic X-Ray emission at a few 10s keV from excitation inner electron 
> transitions in the atom after Auger electrons are released. These are usually 
> visible as distinct peaks on top of the broad Bremsstrahlung emission 
> spectrum.
> 
> Given this background I have a few questions:
> 
> The Fermi Energy in metals is also a few eV typically 2 to 10 eV.
> 
> What would be the impact of the bremsstrahlung radiation photon emission at 
> energies  above the Fermi energy for the metals? Wouldn't these metals start 
> to become ionised and the electrons start to move independently of the 
> nuclei? (Perhaps this behaviour is what we expect tied to the plasma 
> frequency and bulk or surface plasmons production).
> 
> With such a broad range of frequencies in the Bremsstrahlung could the atoms 
> become more heavily ionised? Increasing slightly the electron density and 
> strength of interaction of fast electrons with the ions? Thereby enhancing 
> the Bremsstrahlung.
> 
> Would the high intensity but Low energy Bremsstrahlung photons (UV to low 
> energy X- Ray) excite the high energy electron energy transitions in the 
> nuclei? Or perhaps even knock out inner shell electrons. I think I read 
> somewhere this has be observed astronomically.
> 
> Could such excited atoms can achieve Rydberg state too? And ultimately for 
> Rydberg matter?
> 
> Once the metal atoms are excited into these high energy states, particularly 
> if the inner electrons are removed from their inner orbitals I suppose 
> further bremsstrahlung interactions of high energy electrons with those atoms 
> would no longer produce characteristic X-Ray's? At least until the nuclei 
> were no longer energised and able to de-excite back to their ground level 
> i.e. during cool down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad



[Vo]:Bremsstrahlung, characteristic X-Ray's Rydberg matter and Ions

2016-03-11 Thread Stephen Cooke
I'm wondering if there is an explanation for clean Bremsstrahlung emissions 
with out characteristic X-Rays apart from Axil's interesting explanation (which 
maybe the correct one) of broad spectrum emissions from SPP. 

First some well known background about Bremsstrahlung that I'm sure you are all 
familiar with:

If we do have Bremsstrahlung radiation due to high energy electrons this will 
radiate photons with a broad range of frequencies with a range starting and 
rising very quickly to a peak intensity at frequencies near the plasma 
frequency in the material then decreasing to zero intensity at frequencies 
corresponding to the energy of the kinetic energy Q value of the electrons. 

The plasma frequency in metals is typically in the UV region maybe 5 to 20 eV.

The Q value depends on the energy of the source electrons or beta and can vary 
a lot in energy depending on the source energy they can be a 10s keV but can 
also be even be at very high energies corresponding to very hard X-rays at 
gamma frequencies say to 1.5 MeV or more for example, especially if due to a 
nuclear source such as beta decay.

The highest emission intensity however will typically be between the plasma 
frequency and a few tens or hundreds keV.

Thermal distribution and relativistic effects on the electron energies can also 
have a small effect on the on the photon emission profile.

Normally interactions of Bremsstrahlung electrons with atoms can lead to 
characteristic X-Ray emission at a few 10s keV from excitation inner electron 
transitions in the atom after Auger electrons are released. These are usually 
visible as distinct peaks on top of the broad Bremsstrahlung emission spectrum.

Given this background I have a few questions:

The Fermi Energy in metals is also a few eV typically 2 to 10 eV.

What would be the impact of the bremsstrahlung radiation photon emission at 
energies  above the Fermi energy for the metals? Wouldn't these metals start to 
become ionised and the electrons start to move independently of the nuclei? 
(Perhaps this behaviour is what we expect tied to the plasma frequency and bulk 
or surface plasmons production).

With such a broad range of frequencies in the Bremsstrahlung could the atoms 
become more heavily ionised? Increasing slightly the electron density and 
strength of interaction of fast electrons with the ions? Thereby enhancing the 
Bremsstrahlung.

Would the high intensity but Low energy Bremsstrahlung photons (UV to low 
energy X- Ray) excite the high energy electron energy transitions in the 
nuclei? Or perhaps even knock out inner shell electrons. I think I read 
somewhere this has be observed astronomically.

Could such excited atoms can achieve Rydberg state too? And ultimately for 
Rydberg matter?

Once the metal atoms are excited into these high energy states, particularly if 
the inner electrons are removed from their inner orbitals I suppose further 
bremsstrahlung interactions of high energy electrons with those atoms would no 
longer produce characteristic X-Ray's? At least until the nuclei were no longer 
energised and able to de-excite back to their ground level i.e. during cool 
down?













Sent from my iPad


RE: [Vo]:Lunar LENR?

2016-03-03 Thread Stephen Cooke
 of 
the largest known KBOs, 5 Quaoar. Both of these substances would have been 
destroyed over the age of the Solar System, suggesting that Quaoar had been 
recently resurfaced, either by unexplained internal tectonic activity or by 
meteorite impacts.In my opinion, LENR based on metallized hydrogen is a 
possible answer to these strange cosmological conundrums. I agree with Ed 
Storms that the many experiments in LENR show that this strange process is 
basically produced among other things by imperfections in the lattice structure 
of transition metals: cracks as Ed terms these imperfections. Ed Storms is 
postulating that a new form of hydrogen is central to the LENR process. I 
suspect that this is correct.The way this newly recognized type of hydrogen is 
produced is through the application of high pressure. Hydrogen has a complex 
state diagram that shows how hydrogen can evolve from a dielectric gas into a 
metal through the application of high temperature and/or pressure. More 
broadly, I suspect that there is a yet undiscovered mode of chemistry that 
exists at high pressure which produces LENR active chemical compounds.The 
pressure exerted by the chemical bonds surrounding the voids in the lattice 
structure of transition metals could become high enough to produce high 
pressure formed chemical compounds that demonstrate the LENR effect. Other 
quantum mechanical based mechanisms add to this probability that high pressure 
LENR compounds will form. One such added pressure amplification cause is a 
pressure shock as suggested is required by Piantelli.In a completely 
independent line of evidence, one indication that high pressure chemistry is 
active as a source of heat is the evidence of the completion of a number of 
NASA planetary mission probes that has shown unexplained heat sources in the 
cores of celestial bodies of sufficient mass to produce high pressure chemistry 
at the centers of these objects. These include the Moon, Mercury, Pluto, Ceres, 
and various other less massive bodies in both the Kuiper belt and asteroid 
belts. Such chemistry might even be at work within the Sun as indicated by the 
new solar probes fielded by NASA.In addition, evidence derived from the high 
pressure conditions produced by collapsing cavitation bubbles indicate that 
other high pressure chemical compounds besides hydrogen might also produce LENR 
effects. These compounds include but not limited to water, liquid metals, and 
molten salts. There is also a theory that high pressure chemistry might be the 
basis of the effects expected by dark matter. Holmlid, Mills, and Shoulders 
have speculated that the chemical compounds produced by high pressure/EMF are 
dark matter. The characteristics of these compounds indicated that they absorb 
EMF energy in a dark mode and gain mass/energy through the absorption of 
catalyzed nuclear binding energy to form WIMPS (in particle physics and 
astrophysics, weakly interacting massive particles are among the last 
hypothetical particle physics candidates for dark matter) These particles 
convert catalyzed energy derive from nuclear binding energy into thermal energy 
through quantum mechanical means. These particles in their natural state have 
not yet been detected as dark matter because they are only produced by the high 
pressure conditions inside large celestial objects and exist in a metastable 
condition. Because these particles are metastable, these exotic neutral 
particles (ENP) will decay in time if their stores of energy are not 
replenished in an ongoing process.

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:



OK OK… I know this thought and question way way out there... and probably puts 
me in the lunatic fringe… I Apolo-gise for that ;) Sorry couldn't resist.
I wonder if there is evidence of LENR on the moon or LUNAR LENR?
The moon is:
1. In vacuum 2. Has had many thermal cycles (quite long though ~ about 1 month) 
for billions of years.3. Is constantly undergoing ion bombardment from the 
solar wind etc.4. Is covered in Moon dust that may have characteristics similar 
to nano particles 5. Contains elements and minerals that may be implicated in 
LENR.
Could it be that the surface layer contains modified isotope ratios that could 
be accounted for by LENR? 
I imagine these kind of isotope analysis of LUNAR material have been widely 
done but I'm not sure if any Isotope ratios different than those on earth have 
been identified. If they have perhaps they have been attributed to outgassing 
of lighter nuclei etc.
I suppose to be sure it would make sense to compare with sources below the 
surface, perhaps drilled samples. Didn't the recent "Jade Rabbit" rover from 
china make drilled samples? I wonder what it showed up.
Have X-ray emissions been detected from the moon?





 




  

  

RE: [Vo]:Lunar LENR?

2016-03-03 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hmmm 
Interesting paper: 
DETECTION OF X-RAY FLUORESCENCE LINE FEATURE FROM THE LUNAR SURFACE
1234 Y. Kamata , T. Takeshima , T. Okada , and K. Terada

http://www.u.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp/uxge/publication/pdf/kamata99_2.pdf.







Here is the abstract:







2


We present the results of an analysis 
by ASCA (Japanese X-ray astronomy satellite)
observation of the lunar surface on July 10th - 11th, 1993. In spite of the 
fact that the
X-ray surface brightness is estimated to be at nearly CXB (Cosmic X-ray 
Background) level,
the X-ray spectrum shows significant deviations in relation to Al-K 
and Si-K 
fluorescence
X-rays. According to the intensity ratios of Al/Si (1-2) and Mg/Si (<0.4), the 
properties of
the X-ray spectrum is consistent with an intermediate abundance ratio between 
highlands and
mares (or relatively similar to highland values). However, the X-ray 
illuminated region on
the lunar surface are mainly covered with mare regions and the emission of Al-K 
and Si-K
fluorescence arises from both day side and night side region of the moon. These 
facts
indicate the existence of X-ray production due to bremsstrahlung, with high 
energy particles
impacting even on the night side. 




From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 17:32:36 +0100
Subject: [Vo]:Lunar LENR?




OK OK… I know this thought and question way way out there... and probably puts 
me in the lunatic fringe… I Apolo-gise for that ;) Sorry couldn't resist.
I wonder if there is evidence of LENR on the moon or LUNAR LENR?
The moon is:
1. In vacuum 2. Has had many thermal cycles (quite long though ~ about 1 month) 
for billions of years.3. Is constantly undergoing ion bombardment from the 
solar wind etc.4. Is covered in Moon dust that may have characteristics similar 
to nano particles 5. Contains elements and minerals that may be implicated in 
LENR.
Could it be that the surface layer contains modified isotope ratios that could 
be accounted for by LENR? 
I imagine these kind of isotope analysis of LUNAR material have been widely 
done but I'm not sure if any Isotope ratios different than those on earth have 
been identified. If they have perhaps they have been attributed to outgassing 
of lighter nuclei etc.
I suppose to be sure it would make sense to compare with sources below the 
surface, perhaps drilled samples. Didn't the recent "Jade Rabbit" rover from 
china make drilled samples? I wonder what it showed up.
Have X-ray emissions been detected from the moon?





 





  

[Vo]:Lunar LENR?

2016-03-03 Thread Stephen Cooke
OK OK… I know this thought and question way way out there... and probably puts 
me in the lunatic fringe… I Apolo-gise for that ;) Sorry couldn't resist.
I wonder if there is evidence of LENR on the moon or LUNAR LENR?
The moon is:
1. In vacuum 2. Has had many thermal cycles (quite long though ~ about 1 month) 
for billions of years.3. Is constantly undergoing ion bombardment from the 
solar wind etc.4. Is covered in Moon dust that may have characteristics similar 
to nano particles 5. Contains elements and minerals that may be implicated in 
LENR.
Could it be that the surface layer contains modified isotope ratios that could 
be accounted for by LENR? 
I imagine these kind of isotope analysis of LUNAR material have been widely 
done but I'm not sure if any Isotope ratios different than those on earth have 
been identified. If they have perhaps they have been attributed to outgassing 
of lighter nuclei etc.
I suppose to be sure it would make sense to compare with sources below the 
surface, perhaps drilled samples. Didn't the recent "Jade Rabbit" rover from 
china make drilled samples? I wonder what it showed up.
Have X-ray emissions been detected from the moon?





 




  

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

2016-02-26 Thread Stephen Cooke
I'm wondering if highly hydrogenated or doped materials such as Metals, CNT, 
activated BNNT etc. in particular those with high concentrations of atomic 
hydrogen with high consent rations of valance electrons would have much higher 
electron density than normal metals. If so I suppose the plasma frequency 
(associated with evanescent waves as well as Bulk and Surface Plasmons) would 
be higher also. 

Photons with frequencies below the plasma frequency are evanescent. If there is 
an energy transition in a nucleus it emits a gamma. What happens if this 
transition occurs with an energy and frequency below that of the plasma 
frequency? Is it trapped as an evanescent wave ? Or is the transition inhibited 
some how? 

> On 26 feb. 2016, at 20:47, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Axil, 
> 
> I found this interesting but very clear and simply explained presentation on 
> bulk and surface plasmons, online.
> 
> https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/AnuradhaKVerma/m2-plasmons
> 
> I thought of you when reading it even though it is at a much more basic level 
> than some of the concepts you grapple with. It might help some who are 
> unfamiliar with SPP to understand the concept.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On 26 feb. 2016, at 19:45, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> https://www.caltech.edu/news/topolariton-new-half-matter-half-light-particle-48222
>> 
>> A topolariton is a one way flow of photons into a topological defect in a 
>> metal. All the photons move to that point and collect. They form a soliton. 
>> A solution is an huge single wave. When heat and gamma enter this soliton, 
>> their frequencies are upshifted and downshifted by mutual interference to 
>> match the frequency of the soliton.
>> 
>> This soliton is the SPP. When the soliton is not coherent, its life is short 
>> and it breaks up and all the photons are released can then be seen to the 
>> far field. The wavelengths of the solitons take on random values as the  
>> solitons are formed and destroyed at random. This is where the random 
>> frequency distribution seen in the MFMP results come from.
>> 
>> When a condensate of the SPPs form, the SPPs become metastable and they 
>> release energy as hawking radiation which is thermal. The solitons leak 
>> their energy into the vacuum. No gamma level EMF is released because the 
>> photons are constrained indefinitely in a dark mode.
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>> Apparently Silver or copper has a plasma frequency in the UV region which 
>>> is why it reflects light of below these frequencies
>>> 
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation
>>> 
>>> If i understand correctly at frequencies below the plasma frequency photon 
>>> emission no longer propagates but instead becomes evanescent.
>>> 
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evanescent_field
>>> 
>>> This is probably a crazy idea but:
>>> 
>>> Could very high electron plasma densities be reached in some materials or 
>>> structures perhaps in the vicinity of NAE, Highly Hydrogenated materials, 
>>> Rydberg matter or UDD or UDH for example? 
>>> 
>>> Is there a possibility for the electron density to be sufficiently dense 
>>> that it can have a plasma frequency in the X-ray region or above in these 
>>> materials or structures?
>>> 
>>> If so what happens with X-ray or gamma emissions which typically have 
>>> frequencies below the plasma frequencies? 
>>> Are Evanescent X-rays or Gammas produced?
>>> What happens to Bremsstrahlung emissions in this region?
>>> Could near field or far field interactions of these evanescent waves lead 
>>> to resonance with particular nucleus energy level transitions for example? 
>>> Could it lead to collective behaviour and or resonances?
>>> 
>>> I suppose this could topic could relate to the SPP mentioned by Axil in 
>>> some way too. 
>>> 
>>> Perhaps the maths or physics forbids this kind high energy evanescence, 
>>> hopefully a good Physicist or enthusiast knowledgable about this field 
>>> knows. Maybe Axil can enlighten me I hope? 
>> 


Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

2016-02-26 Thread Stephen Cooke
Axil, 

I found this interesting but very clear and simply explained presentation on 
bulk and surface plasmons, online.

https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/AnuradhaKVerma/m2-plasmons

I thought of you when reading it even though it is at a much more basic level 
than some of the concepts you grapple with. It might help some who are 
unfamiliar with SPP to understand the concept.



Sent from my iPad

> On 26 feb. 2016, at 19:45, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> https://www.caltech.edu/news/topolariton-new-half-matter-half-light-particle-48222
> 
> A topolariton is a one way flow of photons into a topological defect in a 
> metal. All the photons move to that point and collect. They form a soliton. A 
> solution is an huge single wave. When heat and gamma enter this soliton, 
> their frequencies are upshifted and downshifted by mutual interference to 
> match the frequency of the soliton.
> 
> This soliton is the SPP. When the soliton is not coherent, its life is short 
> and it breaks up and all the photons are released can then be seen to the far 
> field. The wavelengths of the solitons take on random values as the  solitons 
> are formed and destroyed at random. This is where the random frequency 
> distribution seen in the MFMP results come from.
> 
> When a condensate of the SPPs form, the SPPs become metastable and they 
> release energy as hawking radiation which is thermal. The solitons leak their 
> energy into the vacuum. No gamma level EMF is released because the photons 
> are constrained indefinitely in a dark mode.
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Apparently Silver or copper has a plasma frequency in the UV region which is 
>> why it reflects light of below these frequencies
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation
>> 
>> If i understand correctly at frequencies below the plasma frequency photon 
>> emission no longer propagates but instead becomes evanescent.
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evanescent_field
>> 
>> This is probably a crazy idea but:
>> 
>> Could very high electron plasma densities be reached in some materials or 
>> structures perhaps in the vicinity of NAE, Highly Hydrogenated materials, 
>> Rydberg matter or UDD or UDH for example? 
>> 
>> Is there a possibility for the electron density to be sufficiently dense 
>> that it can have a plasma frequency in the X-ray region or above in these 
>> materials or structures?
>> 
>> If so what happens with X-ray or gamma emissions which typically have 
>> frequencies below the plasma frequencies? 
>> Are Evanescent X-rays or Gammas produced?
>> What happens to Bremsstrahlung emissions in this region?
>> Could near field or far field interactions of these evanescent waves lead to 
>> resonance with particular nucleus energy level transitions for example? 
>> Could it lead to collective behaviour and or resonances?
>> 
>> I suppose this could topic could relate to the SPP mentioned by Axil in some 
>> way too. 
>> 
>> Perhaps the maths or physics forbids this kind high energy evanescence, 
>> hopefully a good Physicist or enthusiast knowledgable about this field 
>> knows. Maybe Axil can enlighten me I hope? 
>>  
> 


RE: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

2016-02-26 Thread Stephen Cooke
Hi Bob
Yup regarding the evanescent fields… thats kind of the point. But maybe you 
wanted to clarify what I wrote in which case thanks ;)
Interesting point about Capacitance and Inductance. I did not know that.

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 07:13:11 -0700
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency
From: rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Like local DC magnetic fields, evanescent fields quickly decay to 0.  These are 
non-propagating local fields.  These are the fields responsible for inductance 
and capacitance.  It is the opposite of a radiating field.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:



Apparently Silver or copper has a plasma frequency in the UV region which is 
why it reflects light of below these frequencies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation
If i understand correctly at frequencies below the plasma frequency photon 
emission no longer propagates but instead becomes evanescent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evanescent_field
This is probably a crazy idea but:
Could very high electron plasma densities be reached in some materials or 
structures perhaps in the vicinity of NAE, Highly Hydrogenated materials, 
Rydberg matter or UDD or UDH for example? 
Is there a possibility for the electron density to be sufficiently dense that 
it can have a plasma frequency in the X-ray region or above in these materials 
or structures?
If so what happens with X-ray or gamma emissions which typically have 
frequencies below the plasma frequencies? Are Evanescent X-rays or Gammas 
produced?What happens to Bremsstrahlung emissions in this region?Could near 
field or far field interactions of these evanescent waves lead to resonance 
with particular nucleus energy level transitions for example? Could it lead to 
collective behaviour and or resonances?
I suppose this could topic could relate to the SPP mentioned by Axil in some 
way too. 
Perhaps the maths or physics forbids this kind high energy evanescence, 
hopefully a good Physicist or enthusiast knowledgable about this field knows. 
Maybe Axil can enlighten me I hope? 

  

[Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

2016-02-26 Thread Stephen Cooke
Apparently Silver or copper has a plasma frequency in the UV region which is 
why it reflects light of below these frequencies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation
If i understand correctly at frequencies below the plasma frequency photon 
emission no longer propagates but instead becomes evanescent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evanescent_field
This is probably a crazy idea but:
Could very high electron plasma densities be reached in some materials or 
structures perhaps in the vicinity of NAE, Highly Hydrogenated materials, 
Rydberg matter or UDD or UDH for example? 
Is there a possibility for the electron density to be sufficiently dense that 
it can have a plasma frequency in the X-ray region or above in these materials 
or structures?
If so what happens with X-ray or gamma emissions which typically have 
frequencies below the plasma frequencies? Are Evanescent X-rays or Gammas 
produced?What happens to Bremsstrahlung emissions in this region?Could near 
field or far field interactions of these evanescent waves lead to resonance 
with particular nucleus energy level transitions for example? Could it lead to 
collective behaviour and or resonances?
I suppose this could topic could relate to the SPP mentioned by Axil in some 
way too. 
Perhaps the maths or physics forbids this kind high energy evanescence, 
hopefully a good Physicist or enthusiast knowledgable about this field knows. 
Maybe Axil can enlighten me I hope? 

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

2016-02-25 Thread Stephen Cooke
Ahh just realised that the broad spectrum difference from background is 
apparently from a Europa source which does not emit beta apparently. Still 
interesting though:
"[0070] A reproduction of the resulting measurements is presented in FIG. 6 in 
which; the upper diagram shows the background electron signal of the 
experimental set up as detected by the scintillator; the second diagram shows 
the same set up with the sole internal inclusion of the Europa source, in which 
case one should note the lack of appreciable differences since, as recalled 
earlier, the source Eu(152, 63) does not emit electrons; and the third diagram 
shows the signals received by the scintillator for the case when the joint 
disks of Europa and Molybdenum where placed in the inside. As one can see, the 
third diagram clearly shows the detection of electrons with energies ranging 
from 2.5 MeV to 3 MeV which, for the reasons indicated above, can only be of 
nuclear source, thus providing a clear experimental verification of our 
fundamental stimulated beta decay (9)."
(I wonder where the broad spectrum after inclusion of the Europa Source comes 
from? From scattering of the source maybe?)
The Patent is still interesting though. 
From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:07:09 +0100




The whole patent is interesting in my opinion. 
But look at the graphs in Figure 6… look a little bit familiar? not quite the 
same profile as recently observed by MFMP or in the Piantelli, Focardi paper 
linked earlier by Axil, but definitely a raised broad profile.
Figure 7 looks quite interesting too ;)

From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:57:26 -0600
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Has stimulated beta decay been considered here already? I found this old but 
interesting patent application by Rugerro Santilli from 2003 on line.
http://www.google.com/patents/US20030016774
Is it already known here?
Interesting patent.  I've been talking people's ears off about stimulated beta 
and alpha decay (and stimulated electron capture, alpha capture and fission) 
since November/December.  Here is a relevant patent from 1991:
http://www.google.com/patents/US5076971
Could even highly excited but normally stable nuclei be stimulated into Beta 
radiation like this I wonder?

This might happen through electron screening, e.g., a larger amount of electron 
charge around the nucleus than normally happens.
Eric

  

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

2016-02-25 Thread Stephen Cooke
The whole patent is interesting in my opinion. 
But look at the graphs in Figure 6… look a little bit familiar? not quite the 
same profile as recently observed by MFMP or in the Piantelli, Focardi paper 
linked earlier by Axil, but definitely a raised broad profile.
Figure 7 looks quite interesting too ;)

From: eric.wal...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:57:26 -0600
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Has stimulated beta decay been considered here already? I found this old but 
interesting patent application by Rugerro Santilli from 2003 on line.
http://www.google.com/patents/US20030016774
Is it already known here?
Interesting patent.  I've been talking people's ears off about stimulated beta 
and alpha decay (and stimulated electron capture, alpha capture and fission) 
since November/December.  Here is a relevant patent from 1991:
http://www.google.com/patents/US5076971
Could even highly excited but normally stable nuclei be stimulated into Beta 
radiation like this I wonder?

This might happen through electron screening, e.g., a larger amount of electron 
charge around the nucleus than normally happens.
Eric
  

[Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

2016-02-25 Thread Stephen Cooke
Has stimulated beta decay been considered here already? 

I found this old but interesting patent application by Rugerro Santilli from 
2003 on line. 

http://www.google.com/patents/US20030016774

Is it already known here? 

Given current ideas from Norman Cook and Andrea Rossi on the extended mossbauer 
effect along with the nuetron spall action ideas from Carl Oscar Gullström. I 
wonder if this idea of stimulated Beta decay becomes more relevant when nuclei 
are stimulate into these higher energy level conditions? 

Could even highly excited but normally stable nuclei be stimulated into Beta 
radiation like this I wonder?

Are there any known methods where nuclei can maintain higher energy states? For 
example through phonon resonance or electric wave resonance for example? If so 
perhaps stimulated beta decay can be triggered from these states?

Could this be a source of beta decay without the need of decay of muons or the 
decay of free neutrons?



Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

2016-02-25 Thread Stephen Cooke
Great find Axil.

Did you already forward it to MFMP? 

It's interesting that they use Boron as a neutron shield too. That might be 
important for them to know too.


> On 25 Feb 2016, at 05:25, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004/2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf
> 
> Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems 
> 
> This MFMP radiation observation is nothing new.
> 
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>> Where is the big surprise?
>> 
>> I woke this morning with anticipation - expecting to see proof from MFMP of 
>> a 5 hour self-sustained reaction. Instead, we get graphs of modest gain at 
>> the noise level and radiation counts peaking in the few hundred per second – 
>> when we need to seeing a million times more - if the radiation does indeed 
>> relate to excess heat at kilowatt level. Yawn. Let’s hope there is much more 
>> forthcoming than this.
>> 
>> What am I missing?
>> 
> 


Re: [Vo]:Evidence of LENR activity on Charon

2016-02-01 Thread Stephen Cooke
I wonder if they can detect isotope ratios from an analysis of water ice or 
atmosphere from Pluto and Charon. That could be interesting

Sent from my iPhone

> On 01 Feb 2016, at 22:27, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> PLUTO’S MOON CHARON SHOWS FRACTURED SURFACE, SIGNS OF RECENT ACTIVITY
> 
> A massive canyon borders a relatively crater-free plane.
> 
> by John Timmer - Oct 2, 2015 3:10pm EDT
> ShareTweetEmail
> The latest photos to come beaming down from New Horizons aren't focused on 
> Pluto; instead, they target the dwarf planet's largest moon, Charon. Charon 
> is the largest moon relative to its planet in the entire Solar System, but 
> that still means it's quite small, at about 1,200 kilometers across. So it's 
> even less likely than Pluto to have retained enough heat to be geologically 
> active.
> 
> And that's not just Ars saying that. Ross Beyer of NASA Ames Research Center 
> was quoted in a statement as saying, “We thought the probability of seeing 
> such interesting features on this satellite of a world at the far edge of our 
> Solar System was low.”
> 
> 
> 
> But Charon had a number of significant surprises in store. Chief among them: 
> a canyon/fracture system that stretches across the entire face of the moon 
> and presumably extends to the far side. That means it's easily in excess of 
> 1,200km long. NASA says that makes the system over four times as long as the 
> Grand Canyon, and it's twice as deep in spots. "It looks like the entire 
> crust of Charon has been split open,” said John Spencer of the Southwest 
> Research Institute.
> 
> South of the fracture, the terrain becomes relatively crater-poor, indicating 
> a recent remodeling of the surface there. That in turn implies some source of 
> internal heat in Charon, just as there appears to be in Pluto. The nature of 
> that source is undoubtedly the subject of intense speculation among planetary 
> scientists.
> 
> Higher resolution images of Charon, along with data on its composition, are 
> still sitting onboard New Horizons. So a clearer picture of the body will 
> quite literally emerge later this year or early next.
> 
> Listing image by NASA/JHUAPL/SwRI


Re: [Vo]:Re: The vacuum is the glue that keeps the universe together.

2015-11-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
I have to say I like the idea. I have seen Hotson and Hatt mentioned here a few 
times but must admit I don't know much about their theories. If they say all 
fundemental particles are some form of electron in some kind of phase or state 
do they also have an explanation for neutrinos? Sounds like I need to do some 
reading.

Sent from my iPad

> On 16 nov. 2015, at 17:18, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The concept of the fractional charge quarks as constituents of matter is a 
> completely made-up story/hypothesis.  Has anyone ever measured an elementary 
> particle with a charge other than an integer multiple of e?  Hotson proposes 
> that because of this the electron IS the one and only fundamental particle.  
> All other particles are comprised of electrons and the electron's 
> out-of-phase alias, the positron (still an electron).  This is very similar 
> to Hatt's theory (still being read).
> 
> Personally, I think they got charge numbering correct.  There are no 1/3 and 
> 2/3 charge quarks - their existence is a mathematical artifice to try to 
> explain behavior.  Just like the vector magnetic potential - it is an 
> artificial mathematical derivation that is useful for equation solving.
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Interesting ideas and points about the numbering system. I wonder what would 
>> be the best most meaningful fundamental numbering system to use. 
>> 
>> With spin at least I suppose the current numbering system has the advantage 
>> of easily distinguishing fermions and Bosons. And gives insights for fermion 
>> behavior such as couper pairs and atomic nucleus structure and stability.
>> 
>> I suppose maybe the current numbering system is quite appropriate at simple 
>> for normal sub atomic and simple nuclear structure considerations, but when 
>> going deeper into sub nucleon behavior and perhaps more subtle sub nucleon 
>> and inter nucleon effects then maybe applying this way of thinking is 
>> limiting our understanding of the more dynamic and transient behaviors 
>> occurring and another numbering system is more appropriate?
>> 
>> Getting back to the current Numbering view point. Regarding the charge 
>> fractions I can't help wondering (as I suppose many have before) if the 
>> value of 3 in the fractional charge and also the quark pairs and lepton 
>> flavors comes from or is related to orientation in the local space dimension 
>> in their frame of reference in someway. It seems a strange coincidence that 
>> we have 3 aspects in these fermion characteristics and also 3 dimensions. 
>> But I suppose with spin considerations and flavor oscillations etc it is not 
>> so simple. Are there any theoretical approaches that look at fundamental 
>> particles in local space dimensions in this way? 
>> 
>>> On 15 Nov 2015, at 23:56, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The question is whether the fractional charge that is associated with some 
>>>> quarks actually exists as a separate entity in nature?
>>> 
>>> Instead of fractional charge, it's possible the "1/3," "2/3," etc., are an 
>>> artifact of our numbering system.  That is to say, it might make more sense 
>>> to think of the charges of quarks as being "1" or "2," and the charges of 
>>> electrons and protons as being "3".
>>> 
>>> There is a similar question about the amount of spin: we say that an 
>>> electron has a spin of 1/2 and a photon of spin 1, but is that just a 
>>> result of the starting point for a numbering system, which would make it 
>>> too hard at this point to reindex the spins so that an electron is said 
>>> instead to have a spin of 1 and a photon a spin of 2? 
>>> 
>>> Eric
> 


Re: [Vo]:Re: The vacuum is the glue that keeps the universe together.

2015-11-16 Thread Stephen Cooke
Interesting ideas and points about the numbering system. I wonder what would be 
the best most meaningful fundamental numbering system to use. 

With spin at least I suppose the current numbering system has the advantage of 
easily distinguishing fermions and Bosons. And gives insights for fermion 
behavior such as couper pairs and atomic nucleus structure and stability.

I suppose maybe the current numbering system is quite appropriate at simple for 
normal sub atomic and simple nuclear structure considerations, but when going 
deeper into sub nucleon behavior and perhaps more subtle sub nucleon and inter 
nucleon effects then maybe applying this way of thinking is limiting our 
understanding of the more dynamic and transient behaviors occurring and another 
numbering system is more appropriate?

Getting back to the current Numbering view point. Regarding the charge 
fractions I can't help wondering (as I suppose many have before) if the value 
of 3 in the fractional charge and also the quark pairs and lepton flavors comes 
from or is related to orientation in the local space dimension in their frame 
of reference in someway. It seems a strange coincidence that we have 3 aspects 
in these fermion characteristics and also 3 dimensions. But I suppose with spin 
considerations and flavor oscillations etc it is not so simple. Are there any 
theoretical approaches that look at fundamental particles in local space 
dimensions in this way? 

> On 15 Nov 2015, at 23:56, Eric Walker  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Bob Cook  wrote:
>> 
>> The question is whether the fractional charge that is associated with some 
>> quarks actually exists as a separate entity in nature?
> 
> Instead of fractional charge, it's possible the "1/3," "2/3," etc., are an 
> artifact of our numbering system.  That is to say, it might make more sense 
> to think of the charges of quarks as being "1" or "2," and the charges of 
> electrons and protons as being "3".
> 
> There is a similar question about the amount of spin: we say that an electron 
> has a spin of 1/2 and a photon of spin 1, but is that just a result of the 
> starting point for a numbering system, which would make it too hard at this 
> point to reindex the spins so that an electron is said instead to have a spin 
> of 1 and a photon a spin of 2? 
> 
> Eric
> 


RE: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter?

2015-11-13 Thread Stephen Cooke
Its very hard to see how a single flake can transform between a planar atomic 
crystal state and ultra dense linear paired vortex. But perhaps there is a 
mechanism based on energetic and state conservation effects.
Assuming the effect is more classical and simple however could the switch 
between planar and UDD form be explained by first having a stack of flakes in 
the form of a nano wire?:
Do we know how the Winterberg stack of Rydberg matter flakes forms. Does he 
have a theory for this? Is it just a consequence of the planar nature of the 
Rydberg matter it self or is there a kind of dipole magnetic effect between the 
flakes that can cause the flakes to align and stack in this way to form a 
Rydberg nanowire? 
I know I'm being very speculative here, but I wonder if a stack of Rydberg 
matter flakes (h(1) or (d1)) each made up with of magnetically aligned atoms, 
between the flakes, could under the right stimulation (such as a strong 
magnetic field or SPP) switch to a bunch of columns of Ultra dense matter (h(0) 
or (d0)) with each pair of atoms in the column coming from adjacent flakes. For 
example if each flake had 50 or so atoms could a stack of them switch to form 
50 or maybe 25 Ultra dense vortexes.
Perhaps this is too speculative I'm sure its possible to come up with any 
number of ideas. I suppose we would first need evidence of the Winterberg stack 
occurring before speculating on these lines.
Would a Winterberg type stack have any observable signature such as emission 
spectra etc?

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 14:07:22 -0700
Subject: Re: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter?
From: rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Ordinary Rydberg matter is NOT a "nanowire", the Rydberg atomic clusters 
comprising X(1) are flat hexagonal pico-snoflakes.  In this X(1) 
pico-snowflake, the matter is not dense - the atomic spacing is nearly twice 
what it is in an ordinary molecule.  Winterberg proposes that the snowflakes 
can stack into columns but I have not seen evidence of this reported.  Holmlid 
proposes that the ultra-dense form of deuterium D(-1)=D(0) is sort of a two 
atom tube, but there is no evidence of this form either.  As far as I can tell, 
the pico-snowflake form of X(1) RM is well reproduced, modeled and confirmed.  
The ultra-dense form is just speculation, and even the existence of the 
ultra-dense RM itself is on extremely shaky, un-reproduced ground.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
Rydberg matter is a nanowire. This is a nanoparticle. The shape of Rydberg 
matter is important. It acts as an antenna that transmits magnetic power with 
each flack of the nanowire sending magnetic power to the tip of the particle. 
If there are 10,000 levels, then these 10,000 flacks produce magnetic power 
sent to the nanowire tip. This mechanism is an EMF amplification mechanism. 
This mechanism has been experimentally verified and I have shown fluorescent 
micrograph pictures of this process here multiple times.  
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Bob Higgins  wrote:
Jones, your description below about metallic hydrogen stimulates me to wonder 
about atoms, molecules, particles, and condensed matter.  Obviously a single 
atom of H is not metallic hydrogen.  A single molecule of hydrogen is more 
"dense" than the H/D(1) species of Rydberg matter.  I don't think anyone would 
categorize an ordinary H2 molecule as metallic or condensed matter. The X(1) 
species of Rydberg matter is shown to exist in particular for H/D and the 
alkali metals having commonly 7 or more atoms.  Are these Rydberg clusters 
better described as large molecules?  A small particle of metal? Generalized 
condensed matter?  How do you ascribe mass density to something only one atomic 
layer thick?  It is interesting to consider.
The Rydberg matter "snowflakes" called X(1), where X is usually an alkali 
metal, are called Rydberg because the electron orbitals are highly excited 
Rydberg states in high order flattened (nearly planar) orbitals.  The nuclear 
separation of H(1) is bigger than that for the H2 molecule.  Existence for X(1) 
Rydberg matter particles (clusters, molecules) is well reproduced, modeled, 
measured, and is utilized by many based on the well described characteristics 
of the snowflakes obtained, in a large part, from rotational spectroscopy.
The existence of Holmlid's ultra-dense form is not reproduced, and what form it 
might take is completely speculative.  The evidence for it appears to be solely 
from the accelerated species found in supposed Coulomb Explosion (CE).  Why is 
this species not be examined by conventional rotational spectroscopy, as has 
been used to verify the existence of the X(1) Rydberg matter?  I would think 
that the comprising atoms could NOT be in a DDL state, because if they were, 
they would not be susceptible to photonic ionization (DDL states are supposed 
to have too little angular momentum to form 

Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Optical Tornadoes with specific values for resonance

2015-11-12 Thread Stephen Cooke
I just read this article in Space Daily:

http://www.spacedaily.com/m/reports/UMD_discovery_could_enable_portable_particle_accelerators_999.html

It includes some interesting aspects that I could not help wondering if they 
are relevant to Holmlid's experiment. But in particular the discussion here. 
The self focusing of the beam and acceleration and radiation aspects could be 
relevant maybe?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 12 Nov 2015, at 15:26, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> Fran - The only way Holmlid’s claims make sense is that the dense hydrogen he 
> describes is a more stable phase of hydrogen than metallic hydrogen. This 
> means it is a phase or isomer which does not require extreme containment.
>  
> For instance, we know that alloys with alkali metals will lower the pressure 
> requirements for metallic hydrogen by 400%. In the case of the Holmlid phase, 
> which I still call DDL until it is shown to be different, the species could 
> be stable without any pressure or with slight containment.
>  
> From: Roarty, Francis X
>  
> Jones, nice conjecture but how do we explain achieving more containment than 
> a diamond anvil? Does quantum effect also divide down physical containment 
> such that these magnetic fields won’t simply push away the fe oxides and/or 
> geometry sustaining active sites?  Does this theory better support NAE in the 
> coated inner wall of the reactor vs the bulk powder?
> Fran
>  
>  
> A key paper for those who subscribe to the SPP modality in LENR – which is 
> operational in at least one form (the Holmlid effect) is: “Plasmonics with a 
> Twist: Taming Optical Tornadoes on the Nanoscale” by Svetlana V. Boriskina 
> (MIT).
> 
> http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.1657
> 
> Boriskina provides insight into the plasmonic focusing mechanism – which is 
> necessary to focus wavelengths of visible coherent light (in the range of 
> green to yellow, or 535 nm to 580 nm) down to approximately 1 nm and below. 
> She explains this by invoking an analogy of the 'photon fluid' (and magneto 
> hydrodynamics) where light waves will be locally amplified and upshifted via 
> convective vortex acceleration. The result is like an eddy current of photons 
> up to a million time more powerful than before.
> 
> Thus, the Holmlid effect is explained by trapped light which is swirled into 
> optical vortices by EM fields. These are transitory tornado-like areas of 
> circular/helical motion of flux. The result is magnetic fields of extreme 
> local intensity (kilo-Tesla to mega-T.) which effectively compress and 
> densify hydrogen into a new phase which can be well beyond metallic. Metallic 
> hydrogen required compressive forces in the range of 500 GPa, but dense 
> hydrogen requires at least an order of magnitude more force, which is well 
> beyond the mechanical strength of a diamond anvil, for instance. The payoff 
> is Holmlid’s new phase of dense hydrogen which becomes stable, once formed, 
> without added pressure. Metallic hydrogen is not stable in an unpressurized 
> condition and immediately reverts to the gas.
> 
> The specific resonance values for the vortex formation depend on the matrix 
> metal. With Holmlid’s experiments using iron-oxide matrix, the resonance 
> value for photons is 535 nm which is green light. For palladium, using PdCl 
> and LiCl electrolyte the strongest emission line is 542 nm which is yellow 
> green. Electrolysis creates its own internal photons at the emission lines of 
> the electrolyte.
> 
> BTW – Boriskina apparently has no present connection to LENR per se, but as a 
> theorist, she could become more important to the field than almost any other 
> theorist (including Hagelstein) – to the extent that the SPP modality is 
> shown to be correct. She appears to be relatively young which is bonus, 
> should her insight prevail - since LERN field is aging rapidly.
> 
> http://www.bio-page.org/boriskina/


RE: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina

2015-11-06 Thread Stephen Cooke
I like the idea of Jones Beene's test using light stimulation, it would be 
interesting to see some day, even if it proved negative it would tell us 
something. If positive even better.
I wonder if the Spectrum when its in SSM would be interesting, Would this glass 
also be transparent to UV?
From: jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 07:13:21 -0800

For anyone interested in translucent alumina tubes for a glow reactor 
experiment, they are available from time to time on eBay (but not now). They 
are alumina and not transparent, but translucent. Of course borosilicate glass 
is also available but alumina could be relevant to gain.  A more translucent 
tube would be advantageous if external photons are to be introduced as a 
reaction trigger, instead of electrical current. Those who believe that SPP are 
responsible for initiating the gain in the glow reactor already see the 
futility of using incandescence (from resistance wiring) to produce photons at 
no more than 3% efficiency, when a proper external lamp can provide 60% 
efficiency - or a factor of 20x more photons per unit of electrical power.  
Imagine increasing COP by an order of magnitude via a simple change in input 
power, and at the same time eliminating the most common cause of tube failure. 
From: Mats Lewan  You might have heard of the Japanese researchers making glass 
almost as strong as steel. Their paper:http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15233 
  
The popular version here:
http://gizmodo.com/japanese-researchers-make-glass-thats-nearly-unbreakabl-1739673940
  What attracted my interest was the role of alumina in this new material.If 
alumina has properties that are important for Rossi’s reactors, and in 
particular since Rossi claims that he’s developing a new reactor called E-Cat X 
which will produce both heat and light, this new alumina based transparent 
glass material could be of interest.  Matswww.animpossibleinvention.com 
  

RE: [Vo]:Re: The fifth force.

2015-11-04 Thread Stephen Cooke
Thanks for that link Axil. It was very interesting to me in a couple of ways.
By the way if magnetism affects space time in such a way I wonder what it says 
about spin.

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:34:43 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: The fifth force.
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

http://news.sciencemag.org/2001/06/magnetism-stiffens-space-time

Remember this:
Albert Einstein's rubber sheets--his metaphor for thinking of space and time as 
a stretchy membrane--may be due for a dose of starch. By reanalyzing the basic 
equations of general relativity, a researcher has discovered that magnetic 
fields tend to flatten and stiffen the fabric of space-time. The finding might 
force cosmologists and astronomers to reexamine how magnetic fields have shaped 
the evolution of the cosmos.According to Einstein, a hunk of matter such as a 
star bends space-time just as a bowling ball weighs down a rubber sheet. The 
result, described in relativistic terms, is gravity. That much has been known 
for the better part of a century. But physicist Christos Tsagas of Portsmouth 
University in the United Kingdom looked at the equation in an unusual way, 
switching the roles of space and time--a swap that makes no mathematical 
difference but changes the form of the equation.Tsagas spotted something no one 
had seen before: A term in the equation showed that magnetic fields transfer 
their properties to the very fabric of space-time itself. Like rubber bands 
under tension, magnetic field lines try to remain as straight as possible. The 
fields transmit that tension to space-time, Tsagas writes in the 11 June issue 
of Physical Review Letters, making nearby space like a rubber sheet that has 
been stretched a little bit tighter. According to Tsagas, such a region becomes 
stiffer and flattens out somewhat."The normal assumption is to neglect magnetic 
fields in the early universe, mostly for simplicity," says Bernard Carr, a 
physicist at Queen Mary's College in London. But if the finding pans out, 
cosmologists will have to rethink the role of magnetic fields in shaping the 
cosmos. And black hole theorists--who deal with sharply curved space near 
strong magnetic fields--might need to revise some pet notions as well. 
Astrophysicists in general, it's safe to say, could lose a little sleep over 
stiff sheets.
Magnetism is antigravity.SPPs throughout space produce huge amounts of anapole 
magnetism. The SPP soliton in LENR could be the source of the accelerating 
universe.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
R. Mills has come up with a theory that purports to explain the expansion of 
the univere based on what he calls the hyperbolic electron. This electron is 
mated with a photon. This special type of electron sounds like a polariton to 
me.
He has run experiments to show that these electrons(polaritons is the correct 
name) produce a fifth force or negative gravity witch cause an accelerating 
universe.. 
http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20paper102307.pdf

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
Discovering possible new forces in nature is no mean task. The discovery of 
gravity linked to Newton's arguably apocryphal apple experiment has remained 
anchored in popular culture. In January 1986, Ephraim Fischbach, Physics 
Professor from Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, had his own chance 
to leave his mark on collective memory. His work made the front page of the New 
York Times after he and his co-authors published a study uncovering the 
tantalising possibility of the existence of a fifth force in the universe. In 
an article published in EPJ H, Fischbach gives a personal account of how the 
existence of the gravity-style fifth force has stimulated an unprecedented 
amount of research in gravitational physics - even though its existence, as 
initially formulated, has not been confirmed by experiment.Back in the late 
1980s, Fischbach and colleagues reanalysed data from a classical physics study, 
known as the Eötvös Experiment, comparing the accelerations of samples of 
different chemical compositions to the Earth. His interpretation went against 
previous understanding, suggesting that acceleration varies depending on the 
elements' chemical composition. In theory, this force would coexist with 
gravity, but it would appear in an experiment in the form of a gravity-like 
long-range force, whose effects would extend over macroscopic distances. It was 
attributed to the exchange of any of the ultra-light quanta, which are 
predicted in theories that unify all existing forces under a single, consistent 
theoretical framework.About thirty years of research later, there is no 
evidence for the existence of any deviation from the predictions of standard 
gravity at any distance scale. Nor is there any experimental confirmation for 
the original model for a fifth force, which would be 

Re: [Vo]:A hybrid Holmlid-Hot-Cat experiment

2015-10-31 Thread Stephen Cooke
It looks like an interesting idea and not too difficult an experiment to set up 
and to perform. If it shows promise it could easily be adapted to use different 
frequency light maybe even IR and UV to see how it affects the results. What 
ever its result It could potentially give a good data point regarding Rydberg 
matter and SPP formation without other complicating or competing factors, and 
indicate what role a light source might play.

I hope someone is able to take a look at it and try it someday.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 30 Oct 2015, at 18:38, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> There are a few possible ways in which the findings and the techniques used 
> to make dense deuterium for Holmlid could find a direct and easy 
> applicability in a glow-tube type of experiment – using the same type of 
> alumina tube (or mullite) used by Parkhomov.
> 
> To be safe, this kind of hybrid should be done without a laser, using as a 
> substitute, a monochromatic light source. As for the fuel - I agree with 
> Robin that deuterium probably works better – after all, the nucleus is 
> bosonic and the proton is not, but Holmlid clearly indicates that either will 
> densify. Monatomic H, in contrast to the proton - is an atomic boson, so 
> maybe that is the feature which lets either isotope work.
> 
> This hybrid version will be a two stage system – an activation stage and a 
> conversion stage. Both will use only photonic energy input, NO resistance 
> wire, which is a big departure from Parkhomov. There is no resistance heater 
> to burn out and the net gain should improve due to efficiency of SPP 
> formation. Both of the stages can be referred to as “mini-tanning-booths”. J
> 
> The underlying concept is premised on SPP formation, both in the activation 
> stage and in the conversion stage. This requires a light source and a 
> magnetic field to optimize. The further assumption is that the laser is 
> effective for both Holmlid and Letts/Cravens because it is coherent light, 
> but that monochromatic photons will also work. The magnetic field does not 
> need to be strong, and can be provided by loudspeaker magnets placed outside 
> the hot zone.
> 
> Holmlid is apparently seeing large amounts nucleon disintegration – which we 
> definitely need to avoid in a kilowatt level systems due to gamma radiation; 
> and therefore, it would be better to avoid the laser in favor of 
> monochromatic light. As fate would have it, there is an ideal light emitter 
> device in the sodium vapor lamp, which is the small version of the common 
> street lamp. It is the most efficient photon source known – better than the 
> best LEDs and single frequency.
> 
> Sodium is naturally monochromatic at 580 nm, and not only that, mass 
> production has brought the cost of the bulbs way down - such that the 400 
> watt bulbs are particularly cheap (this is apparently due to the widespread 
> hydroponic farming of a certain cash crop). Anyway, an efficient light source 
> makes much more sense than powering a ceramic tube with resistance heaters, 
> since it is the incandescence (photons) which you need for SPP – and not the 
> heat, per se.
> 
> Obviously, one must buy into the SPP hypothesis for the operative modality 
> before any of this makes sense. But once you do buy into it – the absurdity 
> of using resistance heat to get surface plasmons is obvious. It is a no 
> brainer to start with photons, not electricity.
> 
> 400 Watts should be an ideal size for the conversion stage but the activation 
> stage could best use a lamp in the range of 75 watts. The activation stage 
> will last for an extended time frame – say 100 hours of continuous 
> irradiation of the fuel-tube. This can be done safely with a lamp. The 
> alumina or mullite tubes being used are translucent, and will downshift the 
> 580 nm yellow light of the sodium bulb down to IR – which is ideal for SPP. 
> Once activated, the fuel is not removed from the tube – instead the same 
> ceramic tube is used in the conversion stage, as is. The conversion stage 
> looks the same but has a larger lamp for input triggering.
> 
> The fuel mix which would work best, according to Holmlid would be mostly 
> Shell 105 catalyst. The rest of the fuel mix could include LAH as the 
> hydrogen source, and nickel powder. The idea is that two reflective and 
> insulated mirrored troughs are fabricated from aluminum foil or equivalent, 
> such that the loaded ceramic tube is irradiated all around by monochromatic 
> light and also heated to a modest level where hydrogen pressure is minimal. 
> Some insulation will be required. Magnets are outside the “tanning booth” so 
> they can be kept cool, but the net effect is that SPP should form more 
> readily than with Parkhomov – and over time, a population of dense hydrogen 
> will accumulate. This activate fuel will be converted in the adjoining 
> “booth” (actually bulbs could be swapped out in the same booth).
> 
> Once 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

2015-10-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
That was strange my phone sent that before I finished writing. 

If Holmlid's results are not a measurement error then I'm not sure if cosmic 
mouns could explain the quantity mesons generated together.

I'm not really fixed on any particular ideas I like reading all of them, and 
have plenty more to learn. I still have not really understood R Mills Hydrinos 
for example. I suspect and think evidence is pointing to a particular blend of 
chemical, material, condensed matter, nano particle effects, phonon resonance, 
entanglement, SPP, EM, nucleus and even sub nucleon effects. Possibly even 
more. An unusual blend of even simple effects seems more likely to me than one 
complex idea. If it took a common blend of conditions and processes we would 
see it more commonly around us. 

Could it be there are several layers to LENR, and once the first one is 
fulfilled more complex or energetic versions become possible. Once we have 
sufficient loading of Hydrogen and the Ultra dense material produced, and once 
a sufficient and appropriate resonance is set up for example. Perhaps your idea 
of energy from the vacuum is an initial process that already produces 
noticeable effects from relatively low energy. Could the energy generated in 
such a system feed Axil type SPP on the surface of the UDD which at some level 
produce more energetic LENR effects that themselves feed back in to the process 
that eventually have sufficient energy to produce very energetic effects such 
as Phi Meson Production leading to Kaons through nucleon interactions or 
Hadronisation effects and cause nuclear disintegration reported by Holmlid. 
Which liberates enough energy to sustain the reaction in some cases. Leading to 
the very high temperature burn out events that have been reported. 

Perhaps there are other and better combinations of increasing energy effects 
each lower energy effect opening the door to the next more energetic one.

> On 30 Oct 2015, at 14:26, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I did mention cosmic muons but I also be remember reading that they have been 
> mentioned elsewhere in the past i
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:25, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Stephen Cooke
>>  
>> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can 
>> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on 
>> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high 
>> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you 
>> are describing here?
>> 
>> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be 
>> misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in 
>> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make 
>> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on 
>> an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
>> 
>> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic 
>> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large 
>> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you 
>> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the 
>> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense 
>> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF 
>> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor 
>> of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
>> 
>> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The 
>> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the 
>> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be 
>> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that 
>> is the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
>> 
>>  
>>  


Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

2015-10-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
I did mention cosmic muons but I also be remember reading that they have been 
mentioned elsewhere in the past i
Sent from my iPhone

> On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:25, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> Ø  It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can 
> generate the mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on 
> this idea where mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high 
> energy interactions with nucleons and require much higher energies than you 
> are describing here?
> 
> I am somewhat in Eric’s camp on the mesons, kaons and so on, which could be 
> misidentified and/or have other explanations. The important detail in 
> Holmlid’s work seems to be the clusters of dense hydrogen, and how to make 
> them… That and the elegance of finding a way to make clusters of hydrogen on 
> an inexpensive catalyst, with very high chemical binding energy.
> 
> The mesons etc. which are claimed to be present could be related to cosmic 
> rays – and/or to a hidden feature of dense hydrogen, such as having a large 
> capture cross-section for muons, neutrinos or other exotica. Didn’t you 
> mention that ? Plus – the sharpness of the laser pulse can cause the 
> occasional nuclear reaction in normal deuterium, even if there was no dense 
> RM. Certainly the dense clusters would seem to make an ideal target for ICF 
> fusion. I am quite happy to leave all of that to the National Labs, in favor 
> of focusing on the low end. That would mean gamma free.
> 
> All of the high energy results, if accurate, are icing on the cake. The 
> “cake” in this metaphor, would be … finally … a valid explanation for the 
> “real LENR,” with emphasis on “low energy.” If the thermal gain can be 
> understood as chemical, with no gamma and little transmutation – then that is 
> the huge benefit of Holmlid’s work.
> 
>  
>  


RE: [Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.

2015-10-30 Thread Stephen Cooke
 Hi Axil
I have a few questions about Rydberg Matter and SPP that maybe you know the 
answer to:
1. I understand that Hydrogen is stored in much higher densities in the 
catalyst material than can even in its liquid form? How does the density of the 
atoms (e.g. Hydrogen) compare to the density of Hydrogen once it is absorbed in 
the catalyst? I suppose it is stored in the catalyst in monatomic form to avoid 
Covalent bond length constraints. I appreciate it might be a difficult answer 
due to the 2D structure of the Rydberg matter crystals. I'm wondering if it is 
release from such material in a constrained environment if it has no choice but 
to form Rydberg matter.
2. I understand that according to Holmlids experiment and some others it takes 
some time to prepare the material. I understood that this might be to prepare 
the material either to generate the right surface conditions to form Rydberg 
Matter, to absorb sufficient Hydrogen in to catalyst or to produce sufficient 
quantities of Rydberg matter it self. Is this you understanding or are you also 
suggesting that maybe the time is also to Energise the SPP somehow? If so would 
this have transport implications due to stability or would we assume the matter 
is kept in one place during the charging and eventual test?
3. Once an SPP is formed can it sustain itself for long periods of time… what 
limits this is there a limit to the rate it can generate IR radiation or 
evaporate through Hadronisation for example? 
4. What is the maximum energy that can be contained in one SPP. Would it be 
sufficient for Hadronisation? Or would it act in some way to catalyse some how 
the Hadronisation process?
5. If and SPP is slowly generated would it spontaneously Hadronise, radiate or 
stimulate other material. Or would it require an additional tigger… I'm 
wondering why the laser or fluorescent lamps would be sufficient to trigger 
Meson production tom an SPP but the SPP does not generate them continuously 
before the stimulus is applied in these cases. (I appreciate it may randomly 
trigger later with out stimulation).

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:01:14 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

A lot of energy is required to setup the condensate of SPPs, but once the SPP 
condensate is in place, it is highly efficient because it recycles energy 
produced by the meson decay chain back into the SPP condensate. The energy loss 
comes from EMF production and the generation of electrons. Any energy from muon 
catalyzed fusion or pion or magnetic based nuclear disruption would  find it 
way into the condensate.
Inputs
The SPP provides  three mechanisms that produce energy: entanglement, particle 
production and magnetism.
outputs
The SPP produces heat, XUV and X-ray radiation, magnetism, and electrons as 
output.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
1 GeV could be enough to generate Phi Mesons and Kaons through nucleon 
resonance, although I suppose other factors such as resonance Windows and 
conservation of states would need to be taken into account. I wonder if they 
can provide an initial trigger to initiate LENR in the correctly resonating 
medium. If nucleon disintegration is triggered perhaps enough energy is 
generated and particles to sustain the process.
I suppose I cosmic radiation  is a trigger the South Atlantic Anomally will 
suddenly become prime real estate! 

Sent from my iPhone
On 29 Oct 2015, at 13:55, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

Interesting conjecture and it shouldn’t be too hard to falsify. This precise 
suggestion with Rydberg matter has not come up before AFAIK, but going back to 
the early days of cold fusion, it had been suggested that one reason why P 
seemed to have a higher success rate was the elevation of Salt Lake City… which 
permitted a much larger flux of cosmic rays. Muons are known to catalyze 
deuterium fusion, no Rydberg matter required. However (and I do not have a 
citation) this premise was apparently tested many years ago, and found not to 
be accurate. Apparently Pd-D cold fusion does not benefit from higher muon 
flux. That could mean many things – including the lack of deuteron fusion as 
the relevant explanation for excess heat. From: Stephen Cooke  I meant 
"encounter a 1 GeV muon" but neutrino encounters (with possibly even higher 
Energy) might also be potentially interesting if they can occur.
> Would Rydberg Matter or UDD be more sensitive to muons from cosmic rays or 
> may be even neutrinos? Than ordinary matter?
> 
> Cosmic ray muons have can have high energy for example there are 1 1 GeV 
> muons per sq meter per second. Their interaction with ordinary matter is very 
> low. I think this has been discussed before but I wonder if there is a higher 
> cross section with Rydberg matter. 
> 
> What is the surface area of the Rydbe

Re: [Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
1 GeV could be enough to generate Phi Mesons and Kaons through nucleon 
resonance, although I suppose other factors such as resonance Windows and 
conservation of states would need to be taken into account. I wonder if they 
can provide an initial trigger to initiate LENR in the correctly resonating 
medium. If nucleon disintegration is triggered perhaps enough energy is 
generated and particles to sustain the process.

I suppose I cosmic radiation  is a trigger the South Atlantic Anomally will 
suddenly become prime real estate! 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 29 Oct 2015, at 13:55, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> Interesting conjecture and it shouldn’t be too hard to falsify. This precise 
> suggestion with Rydberg matter has not come up before AFAIK, but going back 
> to the early days of cold fusion, it had been suggested that one reason why 
> P seemed to have a higher success rate was the elevation of Salt Lake City… 
> which permitted a much larger flux of cosmic rays. Muons are known to 
> catalyze deuterium fusion, no Rydberg matter required.
>  
> However (and I do not have a citation) this premise was apparently tested 
> many years ago, and found not to be accurate. Apparently Pd-D cold fusion 
> does not benefit from higher muon flux. That could mean many things – 
> including the lack of deuteron fusion as the relevant explanation for excess 
> heat.
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> I meant "encounter a 1 GeV muon" but neutrino encounters (with possibly even 
> higher Energy) might also be potentially interesting if they can occur.
> 
> > Would Rydberg Matter or UDD be more sensitive to muons from cosmic rays or 
> > may be even neutrinos? Than ordinary matter?
> > 
> > Cosmic ray muons have can have high energy for example there are 1 1 
> > GeV muons per sq meter per second. Their interaction with ordinary matter 
> > is very low. I think this has been discussed before but I wonder if there 
> > is a higher cross section with Rydberg matter. 
> > 
> > What is the surface area of the Rydberg matter
> > 
> > 1 per sq m /s is I think about 864 per sq mm per day, which implies if 
> > that if Rydberg matter or UDD is a few 10s micrometers in size it should 
> > encounter a neutrino about daily on average. 
> > 
> > The rest would depend on the probability of an encounter actually reacting 
> > with the matter,I suppose relativistic effects on the wave functions would 
> > also be important at these energies.
> > 
> > I guess this has come up before so if you have a link let me know.


Re: [Vo]:Re: Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
I wonder if they used GeV muons in these tests or a lower energy source?

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:06, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Jones noted:
> >However (and I do not have a citation) this premise was apparently tested 
> >many years ago, and found not to be accurate. Apparently Pd-D cold fusion 
> >does not benefit from higher muon flux. That could mean many things – 
> >including the lack of deuteron fusion as the relevant explanation for excess 
> >heat.>
>  
> It may also mean that the testing that looked at the Pd-D system and muon 
> flux did not include the correct magnetic field and resonant conditions that 
> were present in the P-F testing.   Muon flux polarization may be important 
> when interacting with two D inside a FCC lattice position in Pd with its B 
> field.
>  
> Bob
>  
> From: Stephen Cooke
>  
> I meant "encounter a 1 GeV muon" but neutrino encounters (with possibly even 
> higher Energy) might also be potentially interesting if they can occur.
> 
> > Would Rydberg Matter or UDD be more sensitive to muons from cosmic rays or 
> > may be even neutrinos? Than ordinary matter?
> > 
> > Cosmic ray muons have can have high energy for example there are 1 1 
> > GeV muons per sq meter per second. Their interaction with ordinary matter 
> > is very low. I think this has been discussed before but I wonder if there 
> > is a higher cross section with Rydberg matter. 
> > 
> > What is the surface area of the Rydberg matter
> > 
> > 1 per sq m /s is I think about 864 per sq mm per day, which implies if 
> > that if Rydberg matter or UDD is a few 10s micrometers in size it should 
> > encounter a neutrino about daily on average. 
> > 
> > The rest would depend on the probability of an encounter actually reacting 
> > with the matter,I suppose relativistic effects on the wave functions would 
> > also be important at these energies.
> > 
> > I guess this has come up before so if you have a link let me know.


Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
So if the SPP is able to accumulate sufficient energy it is able to generate 
neutral mesons or signed meson pairs, for example if more than 1 GeV it may 
generate a Phi meson with conserved states which then quickly decays to the 
kaons and then the other mesons seen by Holmlid? 

Would it generate these mesons directly from the SPP or indirectly by 
stimulating nucleon resonance through the magnetic beam anapole you mentioned 
recently?

Sent from my iPad

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 20:18, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There is a SPP condensate involved. When UV kight is absorbed by the 
> condensate, all the photons are concentrated to a few SPPs who form it into a 
> meson. When there are more photons as provided in a laser shot, more SPPs can 
> form particles from the  "SHARED" energy. The condensate is an energy 
> concentration device using super absorption where incoming photons produce 
> particles via specific SPP members of the condensate. This is how a laser 
> works.
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> A comment on the THE FLEISCHMANN SINGULARITY as a clue to LERN 
>> reproducibility.
>> 
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-fleischmann-singularity.html#comment-form
>> 
>> Ed Storms can test materials until the cows come home withoul LENR responce 
>> because the key to LENR reproducibility is time.
>> 
>> It took the singuarity months to build up enough potential energy to become 
>> LENR active.
>> 
>> No replicator could get the the various types of LENR applictions to  work 
>> because of the tricky requirement for fuel preparation. We know now that the 
>> fuel used in LENR in all its forms must be prepared in a time intensive 
>> process. This preparation takes a lot of time and a lot of energy. The 
>> solitons that produce the LENR reaction hold a huge amount of energy.
>> 
>> The situation is like a car with a battery the size of a building. It takes 
>> a long time to pump power into that energy storage device before it becomes 
>> active enough to produce high grade power with a high enough “voltage”. This 
>> is what Holmlid tells us. He says that it takes weeks of applying Laser 
>> power before the catalyst he uses becomes active.
>> 
>> Lasers and dipoles don’t talk well together. Lasers produce plain waves at a 
>> single frequency and dipoles don’t take kindly to that type of EMF. An 
>> electron and a photon must have the same energy level to join together to 
>> become a polariton. That marriage needs a common energy level. Only a meager 
>> number of dipoles finely tuned to the exact frequency of the laser will 
>> become entangled. If there is lots of bumps and nanocavities, then the Laser 
>> light will become decoherent.
>> 
>> Decoherent light( from an arc that R. Mills uses in the Suncell) is best so 
>> that dipoles at any stage of development will become polaritons. A scattered 
>> shot cloud from a shotgun is better at downing a clay pigeon than a 22 is.
>> 
>> LENR replicators do not preprocess the fuel that they use and they don’t 
>> wait long enough for the LENR reaction to take hold. No one wants to invest 
>> the time and energy to properly prepare the fuel.
>> 
>> This is a lessen that we can draw from Joe Papp. No one understood the 
>> reason why he invented a fuel preparation process. If the Papp fuel was not 
>> preprocessed, the Papp engine would need to crank for a week before it 
>> kicked over. Papp knew he had to load a lot of energy into that fuel before 
>> it became active.
>> 
>> 
>> The various ways to inject energy into that fuel have differing power 
>> loading potential. Heat is the least effective method. Lasers seem to be 
>> somewhat more powerful but a few weeks to get the Holmlid fuel up to speed 
>> indicates to us that Laser power is marginal. Spark discharge and cavitation 
>> seem to be the most powerful method of power injection.
>> 
>> We can determine how long cavitation takes to charge up the LENR fuel by 
>> seeing how long it takes for gammas to appear after the pump is turned on in 
>> the LeClair reactor.
>> 
>> DGT could start their reaction in a few hours because an electric arc is a 
>> powerful source of incoherent EMF power.
>> 
>> Holmlid’s effect is difficult to duplicate because most replicators don’t 
>> have the patience to wait for weeks to see positive results.
>> 
>> The choice before the replicator is plainly stated; he can use a powerful 
>> source of incoherent energy or he could just wait for weeks while

Re: [Vo]:Re: Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
It's a nice process you are describing, but I'm curious how it can generate the 
mesons reported by Holmlid? Is there some mechanism based on this idea where 
mesons are produced or can they only generated by very high energy interactions 
with nucleons and require much higher energies than you are describing here?

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 19:53, Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
> From: Bob Cook
> Ø 
> Ø  Fran and Jones suggested that the source of the excess energy described  
> by Holmlid is of a chemical origin (electronic potential chemical energy of 
> dense hydrogen) and not nuclear potential energy long ago stored in the 
> reactants.  
>  
> First part of answer: The Dynamical Casimir Effect was first observed in 
> 2010. It is real, but that does not necessarily provide all the answers. The 
> following is paraphrased from various sources.
>  
> The basic concept for LENR, is that the electronic chemical energy of dense 
> hydrogen, with mass-energy in the range of 630 eV per H atom, is created by 
> DCE. One way this can happen is when SPP interact with a Casimir cavity or 
> pit. The electron becomes delocalized and possibly relativistic.
>  
> However, it is also demonstrated by Holmlid that dense hydrogen can produce 
> strong nuclear or sub-nuclear gain in other circumstances, aside from 
> chemistry. Whenever gamma radiation is seen in an experiment, it is a good 
> indication of the “other circumstances”. The DCE modality only applies to 
> gain from chemistry and electron manipulation. The soft x-rays are easy to 
> miss.
>  
> One of the predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space 
> is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual 
> particles foaming in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it 
> was quickly realized that vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, 
> for instance producing the Lamb shift and modifying the magnetic moment for 
> the electron… and in Casimir force.
>  
> This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our 
> understanding of nature….From early on, it was believed that it might be 
> possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the 
> quantum vacuum, or convert them to real particles. 40 years ago, Moore 
> suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual 
> photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named 
> the dynamical Casimir effect (DCE)…. we have observed the DCE experimentally 
> for the first time in 2011…. In addition to observing the creation of real 
> photons, the discoverers found two-mode squeezing of the emitted radiation, 
> which is a signature of the quantum character of the generation process. End 
> of paraphrase.
> Ø 
> Ø  Is the assumption that the laser pre-conditioning of the materials in the 
> Holmlid setup allowed the increase in potential energy of the reactants which 
> then is later released as EM radiation and hence heat?
>  
> Yes. Most likely there would be a multi-stage process where the laser (or 
> another light source) creates SPPs over time, which then interact with 
> hydrogen in a Casimir cavity of 2-12 nm in dimensions. As it turns out, Shell 
> 105 catalyst is extraordinarily nanoporous. Like a zeolite, but 
> ferromagnetic. Curiously, Holmlid fails to realize this porosity connection.
>  
> The net effect is that the electron which once had ionization potential of 
> 13.6 eV in the ground state has been boosted to 630 eV of binding energy by 
> the DCE. This is an energy increase of about 46:1 per atom and it is 
> chemical. But in effect, if the hydrogen does not escape, the energy which 
> can be extracted by chemistry is endless (if the source is the quantum 
> vacuum).
>  
>  


[Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
Would Rydberg Matter or UDD be more sensitive to muons from cosmic rays or may 
be even neutrinos? Than ordinary matter?

Cosmic ray muons have can have high energy for example there are 1 1 GeV 
muons per sq meter per second. Their interaction with ordinary matter is very 
low. I think this has been discussed before but I wonder if there is a higher 
cross section with Rydberg matter. 

What is the surface area of the Rydberg matter

1 per sq m /s is I think about 864 per sq mm per day, which implies if that 
if Rydberg matter or UDD is a few 10s micrometers in size it should encounter a 
neutrino about daily on average. 

The rest would depend on the probability of an encounter actually reacting with 
the matter,I suppose relativistic effects on the wave functions would also be 
important at these energies.

I guess this has come up before so if you have a link let me know. 


RE: [Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.

2015-10-29 Thread Stephen Cooke
I meant "encounter a 1 GeV muon" but neutrino encounters (with possibly even 
higher Energy) might also be potentially interesting if they can occur.
> From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:00:41 +0100
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: [Vo]:Would Rydberg Matter in Cosmic Radiation.
> 
> Would Rydberg Matter or UDD be more sensitive to muons from cosmic rays or 
> may be even neutrinos? Than ordinary matter?
> 
> Cosmic ray muons have can have high energy for example there are 1 1 GeV 
> muons per sq meter per second. Their interaction with ordinary matter is very 
> low. I think this has been discussed before but I wonder if there is a higher 
> cross section with Rydberg matter. 
> 
> What is the surface area of the Rydberg matter
> 
> 1 per sq m /s is I think about 864 per sq mm per day, which implies if 
> that if Rydberg matter or UDD is a few 10s micrometers in size it should 
> encounter a neutrino about daily on average. 
> 
> The rest would depend on the probability of an encounter actually reacting 
> with the matter,I suppose relativistic effects on the wave functions would 
> also be important at these energies.
> 
> I guess this has come up before so if you have a link let me know. 
  

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

2015-10-28 Thread Stephen Cooke
There is another possibility:

Photogeneration of mesons from nuclei, I have a suspicion this might be what 
Holmlid believes is occurring I the UDD. Interestingly this effect is caused by 
exciting a nucleon resonance for example the Delta resonance which effectively 
"opens the door" for meson (pion in this case) generation. Interestingly it 
also works with light nuclei such as He, D and T so is not limited by the 
binding energy, probably this is due to the energy coming directly from high 
MeV photon stimulation of the nucleon rather than excitation and de-excitation 
of the nucleus.

I can't help wondering if in the absence of this photon source there can be a 
kind of coupling between a nucleon resonant state and the nucleus excitation 
state of similar Energy, spin and polarity.

It is astonishing the amount of information, theory and experimentation 
projects and data there is on the internet regarding Kaon and Pion generation 
and their interaction with nuclei. It's been investigated massively in the 
past. If Kaons and Pions are in fact seen in Holmlid's experiment and Possibly 
other LENR devices it could well be worth reviewing them.

Well I guess I have a lot to read now and try to understand.



> On 28 Oct 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:
> 
> There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
> imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
> measure charged particle radiation.
> 
> Eric
> 


RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

2015-10-28 Thread Stephen Cooke
With regard the above post about possible Meson interactions with Nuclei, 
assuming Mesons are present without fixing on a particular mechanism and in 
case it is interesting here are small number of the relevant links (there are 
many many more to be found):
http://nuclphys.sinp.msu.ru/books/b/Feshbach/10%20Pion%20and%20Kaon%20interections%20with%20nuclei.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269301015039
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/236346244_Low_energy_kaon-nuclei_interaction_studies_through_the__00_channel_with_the_KLOE_detector
http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/content/108/5/917.full.pdf

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/reinhold.bertlmann/pdfs/dipl_diss/CarlaSchuler_BA_v2.pdf
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/349/1/012003/pdf
http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/_old/vol27/pdf/v27p2993.pdf
https://indico.fnal.gov/getFile.py/access?contribId=160=15=0=slides=8903
   (interesting Neutrino interactions)





From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:21:52 +0100
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

There is another possibility:
Photogeneration of mesons from nuclei, I have a suspicion this might be what 
Holmlid believes is occurring I the UDD. Interestingly this effect is caused by 
exciting a nucleon resonance for example the Delta resonance which effectively 
"opens the door" for meson (pion in this case) generation. Interestingly it 
also works with light nuclei such as He, D and T so is not limited by the 
binding energy, probably this is due to the energy coming directly from high 
MeV photon stimulation of the nucleon rather than excitation and de-excitation 
of the nucleus.
I can't help wondering if in the absence of this photon source there can be a 
kind of coupling between a nucleon resonant state and the nucleus excitation 
state of similar Energy, spin and polarity.
It is astonishing the amount of information, theory and experimentation 
projects and data there is on the internet regarding Kaon and Pion generation 
and their interaction with nuclei. It's been investigated massively in the 
past. If Kaons and Pions are in fact seen in Holmlid's experiment and Possibly 
other LENR devices it could well be worth reviewing them.
Well I guess I have a lot to read now and try to understand.



On 28 Oct 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:

There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
measure charged particle radiation.
Eric

  

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

2015-10-28 Thread Stephen Cooke
The meson that contains strange and anti strange quark only is the Phi meson. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi_meson

It's interesting that in order to generate Kaons in nuclear physics apparatus 
such as TRIUMF and DAPhiNE the use high energy sources of 500MeV protons in 
collisions with nucleons at particular nucleon resonances. DAPhiNE seems to be 
a particularly efficient Kaon factory from its name I suppose it is generating 
Phi Mesons, which decay to the Kaons.

If Kaons are produced in these devices it's astonishing to imagine a local low 
energy source generating the same conditions to spawn Phi Mesons from nucleons, 
as the high energy cyclotrons used by DAPhiNE and TRIUMF.


> On 26 okt. 2015, at 17:57, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Yup I agree with you Axil although I am no expert on these matters I also 
> don't know of anyway they could be generated from the protons. I will be 
> interested if someone has an explanation for that. 
> 
> Just to expand on the strange quark pair generation idea: 
> 
> This is why I was wondering that if sufficient energy is applied if a strange 
> anti strange quark pair can be manifested. If so quarks do not exist in 
> isolation so they would normally need to be contained in a meson. Unlike Pion 
> 0 which contain + and  - up quarks or + and - down quarks I do not see such a 
> meson for just + and - Strange quarks. (Does any one know if one exists)?
> 
> There are a few other Mesons however might be applicable. These are the eta 
> meson, the eta prime meson, the short K 0 and the long K 0. All these Mesons 
> are neutral and are their own anti particle. All these Mesons contain strange 
> mixed up combination of + and - pairs of quarks the eta contain Up, Down and 
> Strange quarks, the short and long K0 contain Down and Strange quarks. I'm 
> not exactly what they mean in physical terms. The eta and eta prime Mesons 
> are heavier than the Kaons and have very short half lives. The short kaon 
> also has a short half life. The long Kaon however has a longer half life of 
> 51 ns.
> 
> (The strange combinations of quarks in eta and K0 mesons can be found in the 
> Meson list in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mesons)
> 
> Since K0 short and Long are their own anti particle I wonder if they can be 
> generated individually at lower energy than required for + - Meson pairs i.e 
> 497 MeV for K0 long rather than 996 MeV for +/- Kaon pairs. 
> 
> I should say that if this process is to work either it would need to be 
> contained with in the nuclei. For particles the mass of Kaons this implies 
> quite heavy Nuclei otherwise the energy would exceed the nucleus binding 
> energy, for +/- K pairs it would imply nuclei heavier than Antimony are 
> required (perhaps Pt if available would full fill this) for a single K 0 to 
> form this would imply a nucleus of heavier than Nickel. I suppose one could 
> imagine a resonant or entangled process where the energy was raised and 
> distributed across several nuclei, thereby liberating Kaons from all the 
> nuclei at the same time.
> 
> If heavy nucleons are available in Holmlids experiment this could lead to a 
> test of the idea by removing elements heavier than Nickel if we stopped 
> seeing Kaons (and maybe only see pions onwards), it could demonstrate that 
> maybe this process was in action.
> 
> HOWEVER:
> 
> *** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
> available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? If I remember 
> right there are no elements heavier than Nickel listed? The catalyst I think 
> only contains Potassium, Iron and Oxygen. Is the is correct? If so it implies 
> another process must take place. ***
> 
> I think in the current consensus this leaves effectively two possibilities: 
> 
> 1. Concurrent Nucleon disintegration or annihilation with the production of 
> particles also including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
> how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
> 
> 2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if 
> it can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
> observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
> directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
> equipment to see that.
> 
> But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any 
> Gorillas ;) )
> 
> It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too
> 
> 
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
> From: janap...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> I don't underst

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

2015-10-28 Thread Stephen Cooke
Good point. That's very true too. Those people at the frontier of 
experimentation like Holmlid and putting together new knowledge in new and 
novel ways like yourself Axil are rare individual and way ahead of most of us. 
I agree we should not hold them back with the burden of external verification 
and should trust to some extent their expertise. Its up to others in time to 
learn test and validate and that additional external verification will come. 
Positive or negative when it comes we will always learn and gain something in 
the process.

I like the image of experts being generated out of a vacuum .  Perhaps this is 
indeed the secret source of LERN get positive and negative experts generated in 
equal proportion and allow them  annihilate to in a big ball of energy? I can 
only imagine what quantities of experts are eventually produced by tachyons but 
if the positive ones are ejected into the world and the negative ones are 
trapped in a black hole and sent back in time so much the better 

> On 28 Oct 2015, at 02:19, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think that there are experts in particles created in condensed matter 
> physics. Holmlid is the first. We can't wait for experts to develop out of 
> the vacuum.
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Yup with due respect to Holmlid who obviously has good well developed 
>> expertise in the field and years of experience and analysis behind him, we 
>> nevertheless cannot know for sure until other experts are brought in to 
>> witness and process the raw data and ideally the test is repeated 
>> independently. I'm fully with you there Eric. I hope we get that 
>> verification someday.
>> 
>>> On 28 okt. 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke 
>>>> <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:
>>> 
>>> There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
>>> imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
>>> measure charged particle radiation.
>>> 
>>> Eric
> 


RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

2015-10-27 Thread Stephen Cooke
sons contain strange 
mixed up combination of + and - pairs of quarks the eta contain Up, Down and 
Strange quarks, the short and long K0 contain Down and Strange quarks. I'm not 
exactly what they mean in physical terms. The eta and eta prime Mesons are 
heavier than the Kaons and have very short half lives. The short kaon also has 
a short half life. The long Kaon however has a longer half life of 51 ns.
(The strange combinations of quarks in eta and K0 mesons can be found in the 
Meson list in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mesons)
Since K0 short and Long are their own anti particle I wonder if they can be 
generated individually at lower energy than required for + - Meson pairs i.e 
497 MeV for K0 long rather than 996 MeV for +/- Kaon pairs. 
I should say that if this process is to work either it would need to be 
contained with in the nuclei. For particles the mass of Kaons this implies 
quite heavy Nuclei otherwise the energy would exceed the nucleus binding 
energy, for +/- K pairs it would imply nuclei heavier than Antimony are 
required (perhaps Pt if available would full fill this) for a single K 0 to 
form this would imply a nucleus of heavier than Nickel. I suppose one could 
imagine a resonant or entangled process where the energy was raised and 
distributed across several nuclei, thereby liberating Kaons from all the nuclei 
at the same time.
If heavy nucleons are available in Holmlids experiment this could lead to a 
test of the idea by removing elements heavier than Nickel if we stopped seeing 
Kaons (and maybe only see pions onwards), it could demonstrate that maybe this 
process was in action.
HOWEVER:
*** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? If I remember 
right there are no elements heavier than Nickel listed? The catalyst I think 
only contains Potassium, Iron and Oxygen. Is the is correct? If so it implies 
another process must take place. ***
I think in the current consensus this leaves effectively two possibilities: 
1. Concurrent Nucleon disintegration or annihilation with the production of 
particles also including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if it 
can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
equipment to see that.
But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any Gorillas 
;) )
It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I don't understand how strange and antistrange quarks can come from protons. 
There would need to be a quark reformatting process involved that can turn 
matter into different matter and antimatter types instantly. It is easier to 
accept that light energy from the laser is turned into matter and antimatter, 
especially since the color of the light changes the nature of the matter 
produced. Said in another way, different light makes different matter.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Stephen Cooke <stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> 
wrote:
Could generation of +/- s quark pairs be the trigger for nucleon 
disintegration. Could each pair with an up quark to form kaons and force the 
disintegration of the nucleons from which the up quark comes? Each s quark has 
a rest mass of 100MeV. I'm not sure if there is a meson containing an s quark 
pair however. Unless it is in the form of K- long or K- short also about 497 
MeV that seem to contain a strange balanced mixture of + and - down and strange 
quarks. I'm not knowledgable enough of a nuclear physics to know if this is 
something to consider, but it seems intersting.
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Oct 2015, at 08:03, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

K−, negatively charged (containing a strange quark and an up antiquark) has 
mass 493.667±0.013 MeV and mean lifetime (1.2384±0.0024)×10−8 s.K+ 
(antiparticle of above) positively charged (containing an up quark and a 
strange antiquark) must (by CPT invariance) have mass and lifetime equal to 
that of K−. 
The mass difference is 0.032±0.090 MeV, consistent with zero. The difference in 
lifetime is (0.11±0.09)×10−8 s. What's weird is that two different quarks types 
are produced out of nothing. You just don't find strange quarks in ordinary 
matter. 

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
in physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the generic term for the hypothetical 
physical processes that produced an asymmetry(imbalance) between baryons and 
antibaryons produced in the very early universe. Th

  1   2   >